SCOTUS Upholds Biden Administration’s Background Check Rules for ‘Ghost Guns’
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Biden administration’s federal regulations on “ghost guns” Wednesday. These firearms, sold as mail-order kits, allow individuals to assemble untraceable weapons at home. The decision marks an unusual victory for gun control advocates in a conservative-leaning court.
Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the opinion for a 7-2 majority, which saw both liberal and conservative justices in agreement. As CNN noted, this case was among the most closely followed Supreme Court decisions of the year.
“Perhaps a half hour of work is required before anyone can fire a shot,” Gorsuch stated. “But even as sold, the kit comes with all necessary components, and its intended function as instrument of combat is obvious. Really, the kit’s name says it all: ‘Buy Build Shoot.’”
The Biden administration’s 2022 regulations, which require manufacturers of “ghost guns” to include serial numbers on kits and conduct background checks on buyers, faced legal challenges from customers and several companies producing these kits.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) introduced the rules after law enforcement saw a sharp increase in untraceable firearms appearing at crime scenes. In 2017, authorities sent around 1,600 “ghost guns” for tracing; by 2021, that number had surged to over 19,000.
Gorsuch’s opinion highlighted the significant shifts in firearm manufacturing since Congress enacted the Gun Control Act in 1968.
“Recent years, however, have witnessed profound changes in how guns are made and sold,” he wrote.
Decades ago, acquiring the materials and equipment to manufacture a firearm at home was cost-prohibitive for most people.
“With the introduction of new technologies like 3D printing and reinforced polymers, that is no longer true,” Gorsuch explained. “Today, companies are able to make and sell weapon parts kits that individuals can assemble into functional firearms in their own homes.”
Although the case did not directly address the Second Amendment, it brought gun regulations into focus for the Supreme Court at a time when its 6-3 conservative majority has taken a stricter stance on gun laws.
Last year, the conservative majority overturned a federal ban on bump stocks—devices that modify semi-automatic rifles to fire at a much faster rate.
However, some conservative justices seemed less aligned in this case than in the bump stock ruling. The court’s 5-4 decision to uphold the Biden administration’s rule while the case was still in progress indicated where some justices stood even before oral arguments began.
Under a 1968 law, firearm manufacturers and dealers must conduct background checks, maintain records, and apply serial numbers to guns they sell. The ATF clarified that under the Biden administration’s rule, the kits—easily assembled into working firearms—fall under these same regulations. The rule does not ban the sale or ownership of kits, but it mandates serial numbers and background checks for buyers.
Ghost gun kits, widely available online, enable buyers to construct fully functional firearms at home. Critics argue that the lack of background checks and serial numbers makes them attractive to individuals prohibited from purchasing firearms legally.
In his dissent, Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas criticized the majority’s ruling, arguing that it “blesses the Government’s overreach.” Thomas interpreted the federal law in a more limited way, contending that it does not apply to “the unfinished frames and receivers contained in weapon parts kits.”
“Congress could have authorized ATF to regulate any part of a firearm or any object readily convertible into one. But, it did not. I would adhere to the words Congress enacted,” Thomas wrote.
During oral arguments in October, several conservative justices and all three liberal justices appeared doubtful of the claim that these kits were primarily intended for gunsmithing enthusiasts. Chief Justice John Roberts, in particular, dismissed the comparison between assembling gun kits and restoring vintage cars.
“Drilling a hole or two, I would think, doesn’t give the same sort of reward that you get from working on your car on the weekends,” Roberts remarked to the attorney representing kit manufacturers. “My understanding is that it’s not terribly difficult for someone to do this.”
Gun kit manufacturers and advocacy groups filed lawsuits, arguing that the rule was unlawful and that the kits were merely firearm components rather than actual weapons. A Texas U.S. district court struck down the regulation, and the conservative-leaning 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling.