WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Biden administration effort to regulate “ghost gun” kits that allow people to easily obtain parts needed to assemble firearms from online sellers.
The decision by a court that often backs gun rights resolves the legal dispute over whether the kits can be regulated the same way as other firearms.
The ruling was 7-2, with Justice Neil Gorsuch writing the majority opinion finding that the kits can be regulated under the federal Gun Control Act, saying the court had "no trouble rejecting" the arguments made by challengers.
Follow live politics coverage here
The regulation, issued by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), includes ghost guns within the definition of “firearm” as described in the long-standing federal law that regulates guns.
The law "embraces and thus permits ATF to regulate some weapon parts kits," Gorsuch wrote.
He indicated that the ruling is limited, meaning some products that require "sufficient time, tools and expertise" to create a gun would not necessarily be covered.
The court's three liberals joined four conservatives in the majority. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
In backing the regulation, the court "blesses the government's overreach based on a series of errors," Thomas wrote.
Gun control groups welcomed the decision, pointing to the public safety dangers of unregulated firearms, which are often used by criminals.
"Today represents a massive win in the fight for public safety and common sense," Kris Brown, president of gun control group Brady, said in a statement.
"Ghost guns are as easy to assemble as a piece of Ikea furniture and, before Biden’s rule, could be accessed with fewer regulations than it takes to rent a car or book a flight," she added.
The regulation has been in effect since August 2022 as litigation has made its way through the court system, with the Supreme Court in August 2023 refusing to put a hold on it. Manufacturers and sellers have to obtain licenses, mark products with serial numbers, require background checks and maintain records.
FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane
FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts
The Trump administration could seek to rescind the rule.
FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane
FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts
"This Department of Justice will continue to support and defend the Second Amendment rights of all Americans," a Justice Department spokesman said in an email Wednesday.
The Gun Control Act says the regulations apply to “any weapon ... which will or is designed to or may be readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.” It also covers the “frame or receiver of any such weapon.” The frame or receiver is the part of a firearm that houses other components, including the firing mechanism.
The legal challenge was brought by Jennifer VanDerStok and Michael Andren, who own components they want to use to build guns. The plaintiffs also include gun rights groups and the makers and sellers of ghost guns.
"We are disappointed with the Supreme Court’s misguided decision but recognize this is only one battle in a multi-generational war over the scope of government and pre-existing right to keep and bear arms," the Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
Texas-based U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in 2023, with the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals mostly upholding his ruling.
The challengers argued that the ATF did not have the authority to unilaterally apply the Gun Control Act to the kits.
Although the case concerns gun regulation, it did not involve legal questions relating to the right to bear arms under the Constitution’s Second Amendment.
The court has regularly backed gun rights in other cases, including a recent ruling striking down a federal ban on accessories called bump stocks that allow semi-automatic rifles to fire more rapidly.
The court has also expanded the individual right to bear arms, including in a major 2022 ruling, although in a more recent ruling it backtracked somewhat in upholding a federal law that bars people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms.
