Supreme Court Decision in VanDerStok Case: Pluses and Minuses

A copy of the Supreme Court’s decision in the VanDerStok case is available here. This case was more of a regulatory issue than a Constitutional question.

The decision contains some positive news as well as some negative news. On the positive side, the court did not accept the Biden administration’s argument that AR-15 receivers could be readily converted into machine guns.

(c) The plaintiffs’ arguments about the linguistic differences between subsections (A) and (B) and potential unintended consequences under the National Firearms Act (NFA) are unpersuasive. The government represents that AR–15 receivers do not qualify as machinegun receivers, and this Court’s analysis of the GCA does not suggest ATF has authority to regulate them as such under the NFA.

VanDerStok decision

On the negative side, the court accepted the arguments regarding serial numbers on gun parts. The Biden administration argued that this was an important crime-fighting tool, but we have long explained why that claim is wrong.

We have tried registration systems for decades but haven’t identified any crimes that these systems have helped solve.

In a 2013 deposition in the case District of Columbia v. Heller II, the Washington, D.C. police chief couldn’t recall any specific case of registration records helping to identify who committed a crime, aside from possession offenses.

In 2000, Honolulu’s police chief testified before the Hawaii State Senate, stating that despite reviewing records since gun registration and licensing began in 1960, he couldn’t find any crimes solved through registration regulations. The police chief said that his officers spent around 50,000 hours each year registering and licensing guns. This time could have been better spent on proven, traditional law enforcement tasks.

Maryland and New York spent many tens of millions of dollars compiling a computer database registering guns and containing the ballistic “fingerprints” of every gun sold over a 15-year period. Despite these states strongly favoring gun control, even they eventually abolished their systems because they failed to solve a single crime.

In 2010, Canada examined its registration and licensing program. But the Royal Canadian Mounted Police couldn’t identify any cases where registration was necessary to solve the crime.

Technology is also making the production of guns even more difficult to regulate. With 3D metal printers, people can now make weapons that are indistinguishable from those purchased in stores.

John R. Lott, Jr., “The Biden-Harris Administration Ghost Gun Case is filled with Lies,” Townhall, 2024.