So, sounds like it goes back to the 5th...Cargill asked for specific kinds of relief, like kill Bump stock rule nationwide, and costs and attorney fees. The trial court said no, rule is legal.
The 5th said no its not and sent the case back to the trial judge to close the case in accordance with the appellate decision (a 15–3 decision!)
The trial judge apparently got his nose bent, so he simply declared Cargill to be the winner and directed the case be closed. Nothing about what kinds of relief Cargill is entitled to.
Texas Federal Court Closes Case on Bump Stocks, Leaving Open Questions of Legality
Despite a federal appeals court declaring a federal ban on bump stocks illegal, the ATF indicated it is still enforcing the ban.thetexan.news
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Court Rules Bump Stocks Are Not Machine Guns
- Thread starter VostocK
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
I hope the INGO legal team will explain this…Cargill asked for specific kinds of relief, like kill Bump stock rule nationwide, and costs and attorney fees. The trial court said no, rule is legal.
The 5th said no its not and sent the case back to the trial judge to close the case in accordance with the appellate decision (a 15–3 decision!)
The trial judge apparently got his nose bent, so he simply declared Cargill to be the winner and directed the case be closed. Nothing about what kinds of relief Cargill is entitled to.
Texas Federal Court Closes Case on Bump Stocks, Leaving Open Questions of Legality
Despite a federal appeals court declaring a federal ban on bump stocks illegal, the ATF indicated it is still enforcing the ban.
@HoughMade
Did the 6th Circuit just establish a precedent for future cases? 
With the 5th and 6th Circuits striking it down, versus the 10th and DC Circuits upholding it . . . this should hit SCOTUS next session in 2024 with a decision about May or June next year. A Circuit Split virtually guarantees Cert will be granted; only requires a party to petition for Certiorari.
Could be if they are caught, arrested, and convicted.
DragonGunner
Grandmaster
I’m going to guess according to the ATF anyone with a gun should be a felon. On another note I read awhile back less than 100 people nationwide turned them in. Lol.
ATF had estimated there were 280,000 to 520,000 bump stocks when the rule banning them was published in the Federal Register. When the "grace period" expired, ATF reported only 582 had been "abandoned" to them. An unknown number were destroyed by their owners, but I suspect it wasn't very many.
If found in possession of one, including "constructive possession", conviction in Federal Court for having a machine gun can result in 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Unless someone is deliberately prodding and taunting ATF publicly, or stupidly posting videos using one on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or YouTube, ATF isn't going to be knocking down doors based on sales records, which they have been for the FRT and WOT triggers. If it is discovered incident to some other investigation, I'd bet dollars to donuts it will be charged.
EDIT:
Constructive Possession:
This is access to something without actually having it on your person or within your immediate reach, and is considered having dominion over it because it's in a location over which someone has some control. Thus if something is in your garage, and you're elsewhere in your house, you have constructive possession of it as you can easily go into the garage to access it. If it's in the trunk of your car while you're driving it, you have constructive possession of it, whether or not you even know it's in the trunk of the car because some other family member put it there.
Last edited:
I definitely expect some more anti-2A ruling coming up to do the "one step back" after Bruen.
Roberts and probably Barrett will flip on the domestic abuser case. He's scared for his legacy, she's a woman, neither will touch the scumbag plaintiff in that case with a ten foot pole. We might get an extremely narrow wrist slap against ATF on this one very specific interpretation, but nothing that stems the broader firehose of legislation-by-redefinition. Let alone any real assault on the NFA.
Depending upon the original basis of claim, I would hope they invoke the 9th and 10th Amendments. SCOTUS seems to already be nibbling at the edges in WV vs EPA, it would be nice for SCOTUS to simply go hard on the 10th and force the Federal Government to defend where in the Constitution they are afforded the power to do what they have done.
From Joseph Story's Commentaries on the Constitution regarding the 10th.
"This amendment is a mere affirmation of what, upon any just reasoning, is a necessary rule of interpreting the constitution. Being an instrument of limited and enumerated powers, it follows irresistibly, that what is not conferred, is withheld, and belongs to the state authorities, if invested by their constitutions of government respectively in them ; and if not so invested, it is retained by the people, as a part of their residuary sovereignty. When this amendment was before congress, a proposition was moved, to insert the word " expressly " before " delegated," so as to read " the powers not expressly delegated to the United States by the constitution," &.c. On that occasion it was remarked, that it is impossible to confine a government to the exercise of express powers. There must necessarily be powers admitted by implication, unless the constitution should descend to the most minute details. It is a general principle, that all corporate bodies possess all powers incident to a corporate capacity, without being absolutely expressed. The motion was accordingly negatived. Indeed, one of the great defects of the confederation was, (as we have already seen,) that it contained a clause, prohibiting the exercise of any power, jurisdiction, or right, not expressly delegated. The consequence was, that congress were crippled at every step of their progress ; and were often compelled by the very necessities of the times to usurp powers, which they did not constitutionally possess and thus, in effect, to break down all the great barriers against tyranny and oppression."
What is needed is the SCOTUS to reinforce and clarify the ambiguity existing in the limitations of the 10th Amendment absent that term of "expressly". If anything goes then there is no check on the Federal Government and the 9th Amendment is moot. A Constitutionalist SCOTUS should be able to craft a test, similar to Bruen, to help define what powers are within the limitations placed upon the Federal Government by the 10th Amendment. If I get to write it, way over 50% of the Federal Government (minus the military) simply goes away. Hell, I might copy and paste part of Bruen.
We would also need them to reign in use of the Commerce Clause. That seems to be the blanket excuse for every law written that wouldn't be Constitutional otherwise.
Garland v Cargill (the bumpstock case) is scheduled for oral argument on 28 Feb 24.
www.scotusblog.com
Court schedules February argument session - SCOTUSblog
A pair of challenges to controversial social media laws in Texas and Florida and a dispute over whether to freeze the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to reduce ozone levels across the United States headline the Supreme Court’s February 2024 argument calendar, which was released on Friday morn
Bumping this thread to remind everyone that oral arguments before SCOTUS regarding the Cargill bumps stock case are being held today. Expect all the Usual Suspect GunTubers to videos out afterward. I don't know if anyone will livestream its audio.
Site Supporter
Members online
- tca1352
- EyeCarry
- WebSnyper
- barber613
- maxipum
- dsol
- pewpewINpewpew
- Cavman
- markiemark
- wingrider1800
- natdscott
- sadclownwp
- patience0830
- printcraft
- 223 Gunner
- OneBadV8
- rbhargan
- Snapdragon
- Ruger_Ronin
- bgarman47
- 63PGP
- 22LRFan
- jgarcia87
- Griffeycom
- BOLTGUN
- DoggyDaddy
- fender
- KMaC
- Dean C.
- Joniki
- johns
- thedreamer
- rhslover
- hhi7410
- josem1257
- Doug
- Bennettjh
- indychase
- Percolater
- pokersamurai
- Tradesylver
- wapahiti
- ISP 5353
- DDadams
- Bosshoss
- blain
- spencer rifle
- Wolfhound
- MeltonLaw
- grunt soldier
