This week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Garland v. VanDerStok, a case challenging the authority of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to regulate “ghost guns” under the Gun Control Act. In this episode, Clark Neily of the Cato Institute and Dru Stevenson of the South Texas College of Law join Jeffrey Rosen to recap the oral arguments and debate whether ghost guns—which are untraceable weapons without serial numbers, assembled from components or kits that can be bought online—may be regulated as firearms.

Resources:

Garland v. VanDerStok (oral argument audio via CSPAN; argument transcript)
Dru Stevenson, quoted in: “‘Ghost guns’ in the crosshairs”, BusinessDay (March 7, 2024)
Drury Stevenson, “Shall Not Be Infringed,” (July 2024)
Clark Neily, quoted in: “Will ‘sigh of relief’ after US supreme court gun ruling be short-lived?,” The Guardian (June 22, 2024)

Stay Connected and Learn More

Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org
Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr.
Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.
Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen.
Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube.
Support our important work.

Donate

In The Booth: Sherwood Like Some Injured Guys Back

Canucks Central

Elias Pettersson's defensive role and minutes

The AI-powered Podcast Player