Trump Administration Position on Machine Guns – Not 2A Protected
BY Herschel Smith
1 week, 6 days ago
“Trump administration says machine guns aren’t protected by Second Amendment,” The Washington Times reports. “The Trump administration is taking heat from gun rights advocates after the Justice Department argued in court that machine guns fall outside the scope of firearms guaranteed by the Second Amendment.”
The story quotes Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Case, who, in arguing a brief in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a lower court ruling, asserted “Machine guns are not the kind of arms protected by the Second Amendment.”
District Judge Carlton Wayne Reeves of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi had properly ruled that the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, codifying that text, history and tradition at the time the Constitution was ratified, defined the standards to be used in determining Founding Era intent.
Besides, the Second Amendment says “arms.” It doesn’t say “kinds of arms.” Continental Congress Delegate Tench Coxe’s views were reflective of what the understanding was at the time, when he wrote, “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…. [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
Yes, and a thousand times yes.
Theoretically David is of course right. But here’s the issue.
The SCOTUS will not move on this – they won’t even move on Snope, at least not quickly.
The SCOTUS is very, very dependent on what Congress says about things like this. They don’t like to lead the way. They have their finger in the wind on just about every issue before them.
There is zero interest in Congress in this issue. Even if the FedGov loses in court, the SCOTUS will turn it around.
If it never gets to the SCOTUS it will stop at the fifth circuit and the ATF will ignore the ruling and no other circuit will honor it.
The second amendment has been made palatable for the beltway types who want the peasants happy enough, suppressed and taxed to death. So that’s what they have with all of the congressional laws and SCOTUS decisions.
Until of course they get scared of semiautomatic weapons, and then the states pile of those giving us things like the Snope case that the supreme court refuses to deal with.
On May 8, 2025 at 1:13 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:
Trump claims to be a friend of the Second Amendment and the RTKBA, but he is a New York State Republican who used to be a Democrat. Which means he is nowhere near as stout of a friend as he claims to be. He is undoubtedly better than the alternative offered by the Democrats, but that is a low bar to clear indeed. Vigilance, as the Founders warned, is the price of liberty -no matter which party is in power.
On May 8, 2025 at 2:46 pm, scott s. said:
NFA stuff is the least of my worries. We (Hawaii) enacted a new law as Act 18, session laws of 2025 the defines “ghost gun”:
“”Ghost gun” means a firearm, including a firearm frame or firearm receiver, that has not been imprinted with a serial number registered with a federally licensed manufacturer.
So unless someone can correct me, that means the following are now illegal “ghost guns”:
a. A firearm imported by a licensed importer
b. A firearm imported by an individual on an ATF Form 6
c. Any firearm made before July 1938 when FFA licensing of manufactures went into effect.
d. Any firearm made for the government and exempt from licensing by FFA Sec 4 and subsequently sold as “surplus”
e. Any replica of an antique firearm not subject to licensing
The AWB / 50 cal ban in a different bill was defeated but it will come up again next year as it always does. There was actually one good section that was added to that bill as an amendment that would have adopted the federal definition of antique firearm. As drafted the bill would have made the 1867 Springfield rifle in 50-70 gov’t and other civilian rifles chambered for that illegal.
On May 8, 2025 at 2:51 pm, Michael (from Utah) said:
Is anyone here really surprised by this? Not in my lifetime has there been truly second amendment friendly administration. I’m guessing I’d have to go back to at least…Coolidge, perhaps?
On May 9, 2025 at 11:44 am, MTHead said:
Once again, 2A is not about our right to use whatever we want to defend ourselves. It’s about government “infringement” on our power granted under human rights.
And we all know how much government likes limits on power.
Asking government over and over to limit themselves and power seems somewhat insane to me.
After all, they are government. And it’s completely foreign to their nature.
And with this current crop of tyrants our only problem is that we’re not America hating, drug-dealing, communist cartel members from another country.
They use whatever they want and walk out of court on OR.
We need to be louder about the 2A being a warning to politicians. And that it doesn’t proscribe penalties for violations of it because it’s whatever Americas decide to make them.
Tar and feathers being the least of their nightmares.