Supreme Court Sees Flurry of Activity in Ghost Gun Case

A "ghost gun" is displayed before the start of an event about violence involving firearms in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington on April 11, 2022. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

This week saw a surge of activity in a pivotal case before the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the regulation of ghost guns, firearms that can be assembled at home from kits and are difficult to trace by police due to the lack of serial numbers.

A broad coalition of groups, including attorneys general, local government organizations, major city police associations, national security officials, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and gun control advocacy groups, filed amicus briefs on July 2 urging the Supreme Court to uphold federal restrictions on ghost guns.

The amici support the petitioners—who include the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)—in the case. It centers on the government’s 2022 so-called “frame or receiver” regulation that subjects kits and nearly complete guns to the same rules as conventionally manufactured firearms. The rule requires people who assemble homemade firearms to add serial numbers to them and mandates background checks for consumers who buy gun assembly kits from dealers.

A district judge in Texas struck down the rule in 2023 and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later upheld much of that ruling, with the Supreme Court agreeing in April 2024 to take up an appeal from the DOJ and others.

The amici argue that the Fifth Circuit erred in striking down the “frame or receiver” ghost gun rule. They assert that the rule aligns with the Gun Control Act’s intent to regulate items that can be easily converted into firearms, preventing circumvention of federal law. They emphasize that the rule is crucial for aiding state efforts to control ghost guns and protect public safety.

The respondents—who include several Texas residents who own firearms and the gun rights group Firearms Policy Coalition—want the Supreme Court to side with the lower court rulings that overturned the ghost gun regulation. They argued in their brief that the ATF’s rule unlawfully expands the definition of “firearm” beyond what Congress intended in the Gun Control Act.

They contend that the Gun Control Act regulates only functional weapons and their frames or receivers, not parts kits or incomplete items. The respondents emphasize that any changes to this definition should come from Congress, not regulatory agencies, and that the ATF’s rule disrupts the balance between commercial and non-commercial firearm production.

While some states regulate homemade guns, gun control groups have been trying for years to ban or regulate homemade guns at the federal level. However, they have failed to persuade Congress to act.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in the case in the fall at the earliest.