U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has granted temporary approval for the Biden administration’s “ghost gun” regulations in response to the federal government’s assertion that lower courts had effectively disregarded a prior Supreme Court ruling.
In an order issued on October 6, Justice Alito approved the administration’s request for implementing these regulations. This temporary stay will be effective until October 16.
The #SupremeCourt stayed a lower court order blocking the Biden administration’s rule regulating so-called ghost guns, allowing the policy to remain in force until Oct. 16.
On July 5, a US judge found the regulation violated existing law. https://t.co/EXJMTCrwl3
— The Epoch Times (@EpochTimes) October 8, 2023
A “ghost gun” is a phrase frequently used to describe a firearm that is usually crafted or assembled privately, lacking a serial number or any other distinguishing markings. These firearms are generally created by individuals using readily available parts or kits, often obtained through online purchases.
In August, the Supreme Court reinstated the regulations by staying a decision from U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor.
Subsequently, two manufacturers returned to the district court seeking an injunction against the regulations while the appeal was ongoing. Judge O’Connor granted the injunction in September.
In October, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld the injunction but with the modification that it only pertains to the two plaintiffs involved in the case.
In her request to lift the injunction, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued that the Supreme Court had made a definitive ruling in August, affirming the regulations’ validity.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Prelogar contended that “lower courts have no power to revisit the matter, at least absent a significant change in circumstances. Yet the district court and the 5th Circuit openly flouted that principle here.”
The order states, “Immediately after this court issued its stay, those courts considered the same arguments based on the same record and effectively countermanded this court’s order based on their own view of the merits and the equities. The lower courts’ approach would subvert this court’s authority and needlessly multiply emergency litigation.”
In the specific case of Garland v. Defense Distributed, the plaintiffs are identified as Blackhawk Manufacturing Group Inc., also known as 80 Percent Arms and Defense Distributed.
During a speech at the University of Hartford in June this year, Joe Biden boasted about his executive order prohibiting the production of “ghost guns” and dismissed any legal challenges to the order’s constitutionality. He informed the audience that his executive order remained in effect.
Biden said, “To allow anyone to assemble a gun at home, bought from several different places in as little as 30 minutes. Come on.”
Although it’s technically accurate that this regulation doesn’t ban the sale or possession of ghost gun kits and doesn’t prohibit individuals from obtaining them, many feel it does encroach upon the right to bear arms.