The Supreme Court is evaluating regulations on ‘ghost gun’ kits. These kits are increasingly found at crime scenes.
A key legal question is whether the Biden administration’s regulatory measures overstep their authority.
The Supreme Court appears inclined to support a regulation established by the Biden administration aimed at controlling ‘ghost guns’. These are mail-order kits that enable individuals to construct untraceable firearms at home. Such weapons are increasingly being discovered at crime scenes, thereby raising concerns about public safety and accountability. The regulation mandates that manufacturers must include serial numbers and conduct background checks on buyers.
Lawyer Peter Patterson, representing the manufacturers, contested this assertion, arguing that the construction of these kits is more complicated than depicted by the administration.
Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the government, argued that these kits are explicitly marketed to be assembled into firearms and hold no other practical purpose.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett challenged this by presenting a food kit analogy, indicating that the intention behind a product’s sale could influence its classification under the law.
Under the 1968 law, the ATF asserts that regulations covering firearms should extend to ghost gun kits, necessitating serial numbers and background checks to enhance traceability and accountability.
Yet, the case continues to progress through courts, with lower court rulings previously hindering the regulation. The final decision is anticipated by next summer.
Violations of these regulations require proof of intent, ensuring that sellers are not penalised without awareness of the law.
The court’s decision will have significant implications for gun regulation.
A ruling in favour of the Biden administration could mark a change in tackling crime involving ghost guns.
