In Washington, the Supreme Court listened to arguments on Wednesday regarding a challenge to a Trump-era prohibition on bump stocks for firearms established after the tragic 2017 mass shooting at a music festival in Las Vegas. The case in question, known as Garland v. Cargill, centers around whether a bump stock should be categorized as a "machine gun" under federal law. The legal dispute does not involve the Second Amendment but rather focuses on statutory interpretation and whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had the authority to ban bump stocks.

A bump stock is an accessory that replaces the standard stock of a semi-automatic rifle, enabling rapid fire by allowing the gun to move back and forth while the trigger finger stays put. This contentious issue gained attention following the Las Vegas shooting, where the perpetrator used firearms equipped with bump stocks to unleash deadly havoc.

The Supreme Court's decision, expected by the end of June, will determine the fate of the bump stock ban and address the critical question of whether a bump stock meets the definition of a machine gun under federal law. The case has sparked debate about the interpretation of existing firearms regulations and the role of Congress in shaping gun control measures.