New York State Lawsuit Against Manufacturers Reviewed by Second Circuit
Manufacturers of parts and kits that are used to assemble so called “ghost guns” asked the Second Circuit to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the New York Attorney General over their ability to sell their products, accusing them of negligence and not following regulations that require background checks and serial numbers on the sale of firearms. Ghost guns are made up of separate parts of a gun that are purchased as part of a kit or as separate pieces that are then assembled by the end user and, by virtue of not being a completed firearm when sold, do not have serial numbers making them virtually untraceable. In seeking to crack down on their prevalence, the Attorney General’s Office filed a lawsuit against the manufacturers of these products, arguing that because these parts are easy to assemble into a firearm they should be regulated as so, and argued that the manufacturers market their kits, “as a way to get a gun without a background check and serial numbers.” But the manufacturers pushed back saying that because the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) regulations give third parties the ability to sell gun parts without being subject to such regulations and they are not subject to federal firearm regulations that require such steps be taken as a result. A district court judge denied an earlier attempt by the manufacturers to dismiss the suit which led to a panel of appellate judges to hear both sides’ arguments at a recent hearing but have yet to issue a ruling on the matter.
Supreme Court to Review ATF Regulations of Ghost Guns in Upcoming Case
As we have previously covered, the United States Supreme Court is set to hear a separate case concerning the ATF’s ability to regulate the ghost gun market in the coming weeks. In fact, some justices in the Second Circuit case questioned the value of their insight on the matter given the pending case before the Supreme Court that would immediately take precedent once an opinion is issued later in the term, unless in the unlikely case the Court dismisses the case on other grounds. In either case, the government’s ability to regulate the ghost gun market, and even bring criminal charges against those who may be facing prosecutions for their involvement in it, is set to receive some clarity in the coming months once the Supreme Court weighs in on the matter. Given the current Court’s past opinions and strong protections of Second Amendment rights, the repercussions could be seismic and effect past prosecutions and the ability to regulate in the future.
