... or maybe even did the 1986 implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) gut the Federal Government's power to regulate machine guns?
Inquiring minds want to know...
As I understand it so far (a first quick read and thus subject to error):
The DOJ just dropped, or is in the process of dropping, an indictment for unlawful machine gun possession that was granted cert by SCOTUS because they may fear the "no machine guns" law as it is now promulgated may be ruled unconstitutional. And not (directly) on 2A grounds but on the fact that Congress's ability to legislate on firearms at all is based on its taxing authority (NFA is a 'revenue measure' under the IRS code). If they won't levy a tax on a machine gun, and in fact refuse to take a tax payment on it, have they removed entirely the government's ability to regulate them?
Came across this reading Clayton Cramer's blog. See his post here: https://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/2020/04/hard-to-believe.html
He references this post at Volokh Conspiracy about the case and the relationship to the ACA and the government's position on the "tax" that used to be required if you didn't have health insurance. https://reason.com/2020/04/22/doj-d...-prosecution-while-cert-petition-was-pending/
Cramer also references this much earlier case where part of an indictment for unregistered machine gun was dismissed by the federal district court because the 1986 law forbid the registration and taxing of machine guns: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_...373&q=U.S.+v.+Rock+Island&hl=en&as_sdt=200006
Inquiring minds want to know...
As I understand it so far (a first quick read and thus subject to error):
The DOJ just dropped, or is in the process of dropping, an indictment for unlawful machine gun possession that was granted cert by SCOTUS because they may fear the "no machine guns" law as it is now promulgated may be ruled unconstitutional. And not (directly) on 2A grounds but on the fact that Congress's ability to legislate on firearms at all is based on its taxing authority (NFA is a 'revenue measure' under the IRS code). If they won't levy a tax on a machine gun, and in fact refuse to take a tax payment on it, have they removed entirely the government's ability to regulate them?
Came across this reading Clayton Cramer's blog. See his post here: https://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/2020/04/hard-to-believe.html
He references this post at Volokh Conspiracy about the case and the relationship to the ACA and the government's position on the "tax" that used to be required if you didn't have health insurance. https://reason.com/2020/04/22/doj-d...-prosecution-while-cert-petition-was-pending/
Cramer also references this much earlier case where part of an indictment for unregistered machine gun was dismissed by the federal district court because the 1986 law forbid the registration and taxing of machine guns: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_...373&q=U.S.+v.+Rock+Island&hl=en&as_sdt=200006
