He literally only talks about the rule of law and court processes to explain what is happening on these hugely consequential cases. The fact that you conflate the rule of law with being a “leftist shill” tells you all you need to know about where MAGA is in their headspace.
Thanks for you answer. Do you feel that you give these cases the same effort as you do cases you strongly believe in? I don't mean from a conscious decision, but more of a subconscious one?
from SCOTUSblog: This is *not* a Second Amendment case, but instead a statutory interpretation case -- whether a bumpstock meets the statutory definition of a machinegun. The ATF in 2018 issued a rule, contrary to its earlier guidance that bumpstocks did not qualify as machineguns, defining bumpstocks as machineguns and ordering owners of bumpstocks to destroy them or turn them over to the ATF within 90 days. The Thomas opinion explains that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a "machinegun" because it does not fire more than one shot "by a single function of the trigger" as the statute requires. Alito has a concurring opinion in which he says that he joins the court's opinion because there "is simply no other way to read the statutory language. There can be little doubt," he writes, "that the Congress that enacted" the law at issue here "would not have seen any material difference between a machinegun and a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bumpstock. But the statutory text is clear, and we must follow it." Alito suggests that Congress "can amend the law--and perhaps would have done so already if ATF had stuck with its earlier interpretation."
And even then likely done as a half-step in reaction to the Vegas mass shooting, and more likely to avoid his maga republicans having to vote in congress against bump stocks. And here we are again... the maga ussc (gee, I wonder who paid for a thomas vacation to have him author this decision) trying to placate the nra and push this back to congress to not act on.
The Supreme Court ruled that bump stocks aren't machine guns because they aren't 'automatic'. Machine guns were effectively banned in 1930 (heavily regulated). The M1921 and M1928 machine guns of the 1930s fired up to 12 rounds per second. Modern bump stocks have a rate of fire up to 13 rounds per second. The Las Vegas shooter was firing at approximately 9 rounds per second, according to NYT analysis of the shooting.
The pro mass murder arm of the supreme court pushes this back onto a maga republican led congress knowing full well the nra recipients in congress will not act on anything that protects Americans from mass killings. And insurrectionist alito, amplfying the ussc's cowardice and pro-trump partisanship by blaming it not on trump but on the ATF? Especially rich.
The Thomas opinion explains that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a "machinegun" because it does not fire more than one shot "by a single function of the trigger" as the statute requires. The trigger activation is automated by the mechanical recoil. The shooter does not need to manually pull the trigger again. Instead, with a bump stock, the shooter only needs to maintain pressure and allow the gun to automatically trigger through its mechanical recoil, similar to a machine gun where continuous trigger pressure is required. ATF final rule from 2022: bump-stock-type devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter. I'm not sure Thomas opinion even count as a technicality.
You have to wonder if Trump’s legal counsel wrote the bump stock ban in a way that purposefully led to it being overturned by the courts. I could totally see a call happening after the ban to manufacturer executive donors to tell them “don’t worry..”
