Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Since 1986, Congress has prohibited the transfer or possession of any new “machinegun.” 18 U.S.C. 922(0)(1). The National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. 5801 et seqg., defines a “machinegun” as “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” 26 U.S.C. 5845(b). The statutory definition also encompasses “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.” Ibid. A “bump stock” is a device designed and intended to permit users to convert a semiautomatic rifle so that the rifle can be fired continuously with a single pull of the trigger, discharging potentially hundreds of bullets per minute. In 2018, after a mass shooting in Las Vegas carried out using bump stocks, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) published an interpretive rule concluding that bump stocks are machineguns as defined in Section 5845(b). In the decision below, the en banc Fifth Circuit held that the ATF rule was unlawful because the statutory definition of “machinegun” does not encompass bump stocks. The question presented is as follows: Whether a bump stock device is a “machinegun” as defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b) because it is designed and intended for use in converting a rifle into a machinegun, i.e., into a weapon that fires “automatically more than one shot * * * by a single function of the trigger.” (I)
2024-06-14
Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Thomas, J. delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-976new_i4dk.pdf'>opinion</a> of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed a concurring opinion. Sotomayor, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kagan and Jackson, JJ., joined.
2024-02-28
Argued. For petitioners: Brian H. Fletcher, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Jonathan F. Mitchell, Austin, Tex.
2024-02-16
Reply of petitioners Merrick B. Garland, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-30
Record received from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The record is electronic and is available with the Clerk.
2024-01-29
Brief amicus curiae of Manhattan Institute filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amicus curiae of FPC Action Foundation filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amicus curiae of Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amici curiae of National Association for Gun Rights, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amici curiae of The Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amicus curiae of National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amicus curiae of National Rifle Association of America, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-29
Brief amici curiae of Gun Owners of America, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-26
Brief amici curiae of Senator Cynthia Lummis, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-26
Brief amicus curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-26
Brief amici curiae of Second Amendment Law Center, Second Amendment Defense and Education Coalition, Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, California Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., and Guns Save Life filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-23
Brief amicus curiae of The Buckeye Institute filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-22
Brief of respondent Michael Cargill filed. (Distributed)
2024-01-18
Record requested from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
2024-01-18
Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
2024-01-12
Motion to extend the time to file respondent's brief on the merits granted and the time is extended to and including January 22, 2024.
2024-01-10
Motion for an extension of time to file respondent's brief on the merits filed.
2024-01-10
Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
2024-01-05
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, February 28, 2024.
2023-12-26
Brief amici curiae of The District of Columbia, et al. filed.
2023-12-26
Brief amicus curiae of FAMM in support of neither party filed.
2023-12-26
Brief amici curiae of American Medical Association, et al. filed.
2023-12-22
Brief amici curiae of Chicago, et al. filed.
2023-12-22
Brief amicus curiae of Patrick J. Charles filed.
2023-12-22
Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.
2023-12-21
Brief amici curiae of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, et al. filed.
2023-12-18
Joint appendix filed. (Statement of cost filed.)
2023-12-18
Brief of petitioners Merrick B. Garland, et al. filed.
2023-10-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/3/2023.
2023-10-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/27/2023.
2023-09-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2023.
2023-06-21
Reply of petitioners Merrick B. Garland, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2023-06-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-06-07
Brief of respondent Michael Cargill in support filed.
2023-05-08
Brief amici curiae of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, et al. filed.
2023-04-25
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 7, 2023.
2023-04-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 8, 2023 to June 7, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-04-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 8, 2023)