A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court’s ruling affirmed the ATF’s classification of bump stocks as the functional equivalent of machine guns under the National Firearms Act.
In their ruling in the case Cargill v. Garland, the panel found that . . .
Though the district court concluded that “the traditional tools of statutory interpretation yield unambiguous meanings” for the disputed terms, we hold only that the statute does not contain the kind of grievous ambiguity that causes the rule of lenity to apply.
Though we conclude that the Bump Stock Rule offers the best interpretation of the NFA’s definition of “machinegun,” Congress may wish to further clarify whether various novel devices qualify as machine guns for purposes of federal law.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen. You can read the panel’s full opinion here.
[h/t Rob Romano and FPC]