I thought the Supremes made a" the legislative law does not allow for an administrative ban" not that" the second amendment prevents the legislature from banning the ownership of bump stocks" ? Not really a second amendment ruling?
That's the way I understand it too. The statutes (1934 NFA and 1986 GCA) define a machine gun. BATFE passed a rule which they had no statutory authority to make.
I believe it is analogous to the recent WV v EPA decision where SCOTUS ruled EPA did not have the authority to make the rule it was trying to enforce.
This is, IMO, a good start at reining in the illegal rule making of the alphabet agencies
This case was not a direct challenge to the NFA or GCA and the court limited itself to only the question at hand. Whether the BATFE had the authority to enact rule making absent legislative authority.
It's going to take a direct challenge to NFA/GCA using the Bruen decision to build on. Meanwhile until that case comes along we are winning these cases on the margins thanks to the Trump Trifecta.
Probably of more importance across the board is just what this ruling signals for the Chevron Deference standard. For those not in the know, Chevron Deference is the standard mandated by prior SCOTUS rulings that requires federal courts to defer to "expert opinion" of federal regulatory agencies when contemplating cases of this type.
Like the much needed challenge to NFA/GCA a case will come along that'll get Chevron Deference knocked down and maybe, just maybe, we can get the various alphabet agencies reined in on the ever growing regulatory burden.