KJP says Republicans ‘getting in the way’ of securing border, denies Biden’s visit is political
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Wednesday downplayed the notion that President Biden’s trip to the U.S.-Mexico border on Thursday was political and blamed Republicans for making the crisis worse. President Biden and his Republican rival, former President Donald Trump, are both scheduled to make dueling trips to the border on Thursday. Biden will visit Brownsville, while Trump will visit Eagle Pass, an area that has seen high levels of illegal crossings and has become a flashpoint in an ongoing battle between Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the Biden administration. Responding to a reporter’s question that Biden’s visit was merely in reaction to Trump’s visit – during an election year, no less – Jean-Pierre said the president’s schedule couldn’t just be upended on such short notice. “[The president] has said that when Republicans rejected that Senate bipartisan bill on border security, on the immigration policy to fix a broken system that has been broken for decades, he said he was going to take it directly to the American people and also at the same time, hear from law enforcement and frontline personnel who deal with this issue every day,” Jean-Pierre said. President Biden, despite reversing many Trump-era border policies upon taking office, has repeatedly said his hands are tied on the border issue, saying the matter must be solved via legislation. A bipartisan Biden-backed border security deal crafted by Senate negotiators amid an unprecedented surge in immigration collapsed in early February after Trump signaled his disapproval. That, in turn, has given the White House fodder to accuse Republicans of not taking the border issue seriously. WHITE HOUSE CALLS FOR SANCTUARY CITIES TO COOPERATE WITH ICE, AMID FUROR OVER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CRIMES Jean-Pierre said Republicans, having rejected the deal, are “getting in the way” when it comes to fixing the border. “This is not about politics for this president. This is about how we’re going to fix an issue that the majority of Americans care about, a broken immigration system, the challenges at the border. That’s why the president thought it was important to go at this time,” Jean-Pierre said. Fox News’ Jacqui Heinrich noted that the administration has often criticized Republicans who go to the border to hold similar press conferences, writing them off as “publicity stunts” and “photo ops.” Jean-Pierre said Biden’s visit was “very different,” and repeated her assertion that Republicans “constantly get in the way.” “They consistently get in the way of what the president is trying to do to get more resources,” Jean-Pierre said. “They are turning this into a political stunt by listening to Donald Trump and saying that they need to kill it.” On the suggestion that Biden just happened to be going to the border during an election year, despite it being a problem for the past three years, Jean-Pierre pointed to Biden’s “comprehensive immigration policy” implemented on day one of his presidency. “He did that on the first day. That was his first piece of legislation. I would hope the American people would see how serious this president was or is about fixing this issue,” she said. MARYLAND COUNTY TO OPEN ICE COOPERATION AFTER PAST STONEWALLING, RELEASE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS After taking office, Biden signed two executive orders on immigration and pledged to roll back many of the policies put in place by his predecessor, former President Donald Trump. Within a few months, Biden took more than 90 actions related to the border. Under the president’s stewardship, illegal immigration has skyrocketed to historic levels. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) report for fiscal 2023 showed that the number of illegal immigrants on the non-detained docket soared from 3.7 million in FY 2021 to nearly 4.8 million in FY 2022 to nearly 6.2 million in FY 2023. Thursday will mark Biden’s second visit to the border since taking office. The area he is visiting, the Rio Grande Valley, which includes Brownsville, gives Biden a platform where illegal crossings have dropped sharply. The area is also a friendly congressional district that – as noted by Border Patrol Union President Brandon Judd – historically hasn’t seen much illegal traffic, in large part due to the infrastructure Trump provided while in office, and more recently due to the actions of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott since Biden took office.
Biden health summary released by White House, president called ‘healthy, robust’
President Biden was declared a “healthy, robust 81-year-old,” following his physical examination. In a release from Dr. Kevin O’Connor, the Physician for the President, Biden was declared fit to “successfully execute the duties of the presidency.” “President Biden is a healthy, active 81-year-old male, who remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the Presidency, to include those as Chief Executive, Head of State and Commander in Chief,” the release said. Under the note for Biden’s physical exam, Dr. O’Connor found that the president’s physical exam was “essentially unchanged from baseline.” O’Connor also said that Biden’s gait remains stiff but “has not worsened” from last year.
UN expert defends climate protesters disrupting traffic, attacking famous artwork
A United Nations expert issued a report Wednesday vigorously defending climate activists whose protests have involved blocking traffic and attacking famous artwork worldwide. The report – authored by U.N. Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders Michael Forst – stated that government leaders should listen to activists who engage in disruptive actions, rather than punish them for law violations. Forst’s report further characterized recent government actions cracking down on climate protests as “repression,” and a threat to democracy and human rights. “The repression that environmental activists who use peaceful civil disobedience are currently facing in Europe is a major threat to democracy and human rights,” the report states. “The environmental emergency that we are collectively facing, and that scientists have been documenting for decades, cannot be addressed if those raising the alarm and demanding action are criminalized for it.” “The only legitimate response to peaceful environmental activism and civil disobedience at this point is that the authorities, the media, and the public realize how essential it is for us all to listen to what environmental defenders have to say,” it adds. UNITED NATIONS SET TO CALL ON AMERICANS TO REDUCE MEAT CONSUMPTION According to Forst, who was elected the first U.N. special rapporteur on environmental defenders in 2022, under the 1998 Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, peaceful environmental protests are protected as a “legitimate exercise of the public’s right to participate in decision-making.” In the report, he outlined how government authorities worldwide are increasingly restricting certain forms of climate protests in a “stark increase in repression.” DARK MONEY FUND POURED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO ECO ACTIVIST GROUPS BLOCKING HIGHWAYS, DESTROYING FAMOUS ART He noted that eco activists are often compared to terrorists: counterterrorism laws are being used against environmental protesters, police use water cannons and pepper spray to disperse “peaceful” climate protests, protesters are arrested, and protesters who blocked traffic have received prison sentences of up to three years. “In several countries, environmental activism has been labeled as a potential terrorist threat. Legislation is increasingly being used to stifle environmental protest through the introduction of new offenses, harsher sentences, and bans on particular forms of protest,” Forst states in the report. “By categorizing environmental activism as a potential terrorist threat, by limiting freedom of expression and by criminalizing certain forms of protests and protesters, these legislative and policy changes contribute to the shrinking of the civic space and seriously threaten the vitality of democratic societies,” he continues. “They also provide the legal basis for the repression of environmental defenders by law enforcement.” UN CLIMATE SUMMIT SERVING GOURMET BURGERS, BBQ AS IT CALLS FOR AMERICANS TO STOP EATING MEAT The report highlights specific examples of alleged repression in France, Northern Ireland, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Denmark, Spain, Germany, Austria, Netherlands and Finland. “These trends give rise to the impression that the authorities’ intention is primarily to intimidate people from engaging in protest,” Forst adds. He then called for nations to address the root causes of the protests by rapidly transitioning from fossil fuels to green energy alternatives. The top U.N. official also calls for the media, lawmakers, courts and law enforcement to tolerate environmental protests. Forst’s report comes as left-wing groups like the global Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil in the U.K., Riposte Alimentaire in France, Ultima Generazione in Italy, Restore Wetlands in Sweden, Stopp Oljeletinga in Norway, and Declare Emergency in the U.S. continue to organize civil disobedience protests worldwide. The increasing number of such actions have sparked widespread criticism. For example, in January, Riposte Alimentaire activists threw soup at the famous “Mona Lisa” painting in Paris. Similar protests have included actions in which activists defaced Vincent van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” in London, a Monet painting in Stockholm, and Sandro Botticelli’s “Primavera” in Florence.
Comer says impeachment inquiry moving to ‘next phase,’ with Hunter Biden testifying at public hearing
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said the impeachment inquiry against President Biden will move into its “next phase,” which will include Hunter Biden testifying publicly during an open hearing. Hunter Biden appeared on Capitol Hill for his closed-door, deposition at the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees on Wednesday. HUNTER BIDEN TESTIFIES HE ‘DID NOT INVOLVE’ HIS FATHER IN HIS BUSINESSES, CALLS IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY ‘BASELESS’ The first son testified that he “did not involve” his father in his businesses, while blasting House Republicans for having “hunted” him in a “partisan political pursuit” and impeachment inquiry against his father. He also said Republicans have no evidence against his father, the president, “because there isn’t any.” Comer, R-Ky., made a public statement Wednesday afternoon, saying that Hunter’s appearance “was a great deposition for us.” Hunter Biden, however, thought the deposition went well for him. On his way out of the hearing room Wednesday, Hunter Biden told reporters he thought the hearing went “great.” “It proves several bits of our evidence that we’ve been conducting throughout this investigation,” Comer said. “But there are also some contradictory statements that I think need further review.” Comer added: “So this impeachment inquiry will now go to the next phase, which will be a public hearing.” BIDEN MET WITH CHAIRMAN OF CHINESE ENERGY FIRM HUNTER DID BUSINESS WITH IN 2017, EX-ASSOCIATE TESTIFIES Comer stressed that Hunter Biden and his attorney have “demanded” a public hearing following the deposition. “Just as I said, when we said we were going to do the deposition first, we will have a public hearing next,” he explained. “So I think that the public hearing hopefully will clear up some discrepancies between some of the statements that were made between some of the associates and what we heard today.” But Comer said “all in all,” he is “very optimistic, very excited about this deposition.” “I look forward to releasing the transcripts as soon as both sides agree to that,” Comer said, hinting that the first son’s transcript of his deposition could be released to the public by the end of the week. “Hopefully that’ll be within the next 2 or 3 days.” JOE BIDEN ‘ENABLED’ FAMILY TO SELL ACCESS TO ‘DANGEROUS ADVERSARIES,’ TONY BOBULINSKI TESTIFIES During his opening statement Wednesday, obtained by Fox News, Hunter Biden testified that he was present “to provide the Committees with the one uncontestable fact that should end the false premise of this inquiry: I did not involve my father in my business.” “Not while I was a practicing lawyer, not in my investments or transactions domestic or international, not as a board member, and not as an artist. Never,” he stressed. “You do not have evidence to support the baseless and MAGA-motivated conspiracies about my father because there isn’t any.” The first son said he hopes his testimony will “put an end to this baseless and destructive political charade.” “You have wasted valuable time and resources attacking me and my family for your own political gain when you should be fixing the real problems in this country that desperately need your attention,” he testified. FLASHBACK: GOP-LED COMMITTEES RELEASE INTERIM REPORT ON HUNTER BIDEN, BURISMA PROBE Hunter Biden’s testimony comes after his uncle, President Biden’s younger brother James Biden, testified last week as part of the impeachment inquiry. James Biden testified that President Biden “has never had any involvement or any direct or indirect financial interest” in his business ventures. House Republicans have heard testimony from a number of the first son’s former business associates, like Bobulinski, who testified before the committees earlier this month that Joe Biden was involved in the family’s business ventures. He also testified that he personally met with him. Days before Bobulinski’s testimony, another former business associate, Rob Walker, testified that Joe Biden met with the chairman of the Chinese energy firm CEFC that his brother and son did business with. After Walker’s testimony, the House Oversight Committee said it was able to “now confirm Joe Biden met with nearly every foreign national who funneled money to his son.” House Democrats and the White House have criticized the inquiry as baseless, but Republicans insist they have just scratched the surface of the investigation into Biden family businesses.
Missouri lawmakers push to block Medicaid funds from going to Planned Parenthood
Missouri’s Republican lawmakers are once again trying to block federal health care dollars from going to the state’s Planned Parenthood clinics, this time weeks after the Missouri Supreme Court thwarted a previous attempt to end that funding. The Republican-led House on Wednesday gave initial approval to a bill that would bar Medicaid funding from going to Planned Parenthood, which is already banned by state law from providing abortions in almost all circumstances. GIRL SCOUTS ‘REGRET ANY HURT CAUSED’ BY REGIONAL COUNCIL TRYING TO STOP TROOP’S PRO-PALESTINIAN FUNDRAISER Republican lawmakers argued no public funding should go to the organization, which offers abortions in other states. “When you do business with an entity like a Planned Parenthood, you’re ultimately subsidizing those abortion services, even if they are in other states,” bill sponsor Rep. Cody Smith said during Wednesday floor debate. House Democrats said the ban will limit low-income residents’ choice in where they go for health care such as cancer screenings and birth control. In some areas of the state, Democratic Rep. Patty Lewis said it could mean blocking access to those services altogether. “In the state of Missouri, defunding Planned Parenthood services is defunding affordable access for our constituents,” Lewis said. The measure needs another vote of approval in the House before it can move to the Senate. A similar effort to block Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood stalled in the GOP-led Senate earlier this month after a Democrat attempted to amend the bill to allow exceptions for rape and incest under the state’s current ban on almost all abortions. Missouri in 2022 banned abortion except in cases of medical emergencies. Lawmakers previously were able to stop money from going to Planned Parenthood in the 2019 fiscal year by forgoing some federal funding to avoid requirements that the clinics be reimbursed if low-income patients go there for birth control, cancer screenings and other preventative care. Missouri instead used state money to pay for those services. But the Missouri Supreme Court in 2020 ruled lawmakers violated the state constitution by making the policy change through the state budget instead of a separate bill, forcing the state to reimburse Planned Parenthood for health care provided to Medicaid patients. Republican lawmakers are acting with increased urgency this year after the Missouri Supreme Court earlier this month rejected yet another attempt by Republican state officials to block taxpayer dollars from going to Planned Parenthood, citing a failure in the state’s legal appeal. The high court’s decision upheld a ruling by a trial judge, who found that a 2022 funding bill violated the state constitution. The Supreme Court said Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s office failed to appeal a claim that the law violated equal protection rights, and it thus must stand. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Also pending is an effort to amend the state constitution to protect abortion rights. Supporters now are working to gather more than 170,000 voter signatures by May 5 to get on the November ballot.
Mississippi bill would close 3 of 8 state universities, but lawmakers say it’s unlikely to pass
A bill proposed in Mississippi would close three of the state’s eight public universities, but lawmakers in the House and Senate said Wednesday that it is unlikely to pass. Under the proposal from Republican Sen. John Polk of Hattiesburg, the board that governs the eight schools would choose three to close by June 30, 2028. The bill does not specify which institutions would close but says the board would make the decision based on enrollment, federal aid, tuition rates, degree programs and local economic impact. MISSISSIPPI MAN GETS OVER 3 YEARS FOR RACIST, HOMICIDAL THREATS MADE ON SNAPCHAT House Universities and Colleges Committee Chairman Donnie Scoggin, a Republican from Ellisville, said he had not studied Polk’s bill, but a study committee to evaluate those metrics would be a necessary prerequisite. “I am not for closing any of the colleges at this time without having a whole lot more knowledge,” Scoggin told The Associated Press. “I would not support that without knowing a whole lot more.” Citing declining enrollment at several institutions, Polk has said the Legislature is appropriating too much money to keep the universities afloat. He declined to comment further on Wednesday. Polk’s proposal is not the first attempt to reduce the number of universities in Mississippi. In 2009, then-Gov. Haley Barbour said Mississippi could not afford to keep all eight. Barbour, a Republican, proposed reducing the number to five by merging Mississippi University for Women into Mississippi State University and consolidating the three historically Black universities — Alcorn State, Jackson State and Mississippi Valley State — into one school with Jackson State in charge. His proposal never gained traction because of widespread opposition from legislators and alumni groups. Democratic Sen. Hillman Frazier of Jackson said Barbour’s failure showed there has never been a strong appetite for closing institutions in Mississippi. He also said the universities could reverse their enrollment declines with more state support. “If you give the institutions the tools they need to attract students, that will address that,” Frazier said. “It sounds good politically, trying to be a fiscal conservative, but we need to give our universities the tools they need to be successful.” Mississippi University for Women has attempted to recruit more students by switching to a name that doesn’t include the word “Women.” But the university said last week that it was pausing that rebranding effort. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Republican Sen. Nicole Boyd of Oxford, who chairs the Senate Universities and Colleges Committee, said she was still reviewing Polk’s legislation with no immediate plan to bring it up for a vote.
White House calls for sanctuary cities to cooperate with ICE, amid furor over illegal immigrant crimes
The White House is calling for “sanctuary” cities and jurisdictions across the U.S. to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in turning over criminal illegal immigrants for deportation, just as there is renewed scrutiny over such policies in the wake of several high-profile crimes committed by illegal immigrants who had previously been released by local law enforcement despite pleas from ICE. “We welcome local law enforcement’s support and cooperation in apprehending and removing individuals who pose a risk to national security or public safety,” a White House spokesperson told Fox News Digital on Wednesday in response to a question about its stance on sanctuary cities. “When a local jurisdiction has information about an individual who could pose a threat to public safety, we want them to share that information with ICE.” “Just since May 12, DHS has removed or returned more than 565,000 individuals – the vast majority of whom crossed the Southwest Border. 565,000 removals and returns is more than every full fiscal year since 2013,” they said. Sanctuary cities either limit or outright forbid law enforcement from honoring ICE detainers – which are requests from the agency that ICE be notified ahead of their release from state custody and allowed to transfer illegal immigrant criminals into custody. This week it was revealed by ICE that the alleged killer of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley was previously arrested in NYC, but that he was released before ICE could issue a detainer. SALVADORAN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ARRESTED IN CONNECTION TO MARYLAND MURDER OF 2-YEAR-OLD BOY Separately, there have been other alleged crimes committed by illegal immigrants, including an arrest in connection to the murder of a 2-year-old in Maryland, who had detainers lodged against them but were not honored by authorities. ICE announced this week the arrest and conviction of a Guatemalan illegal immigrant for the sexual assault of a child in Boston. He has been released despite ICE lodging a detainer against him. Biden will travel to the southern border in Brownsville, Texas in the Rio Grande Valley on Thursday. He will meet with Border Patrol, law enforcement and local leaders. The White House said he will renew his calls for Congress to pass a bipartisan border agreement, which would have increased staffing to the border as well as tightening asylum rules and increasing funding to communities and NGO’s receiving migrants. NYC MAYOR CONTINUES CALLS FOR SANCTUARY CITY AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DEPORTATION OF VIOLENT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS “He will discuss the urgent need to pass the Senate bipartisan border security agreement, the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border in decades,” a spokesperson said. “He will reiterate his calls for Congressional Republicans to stop playing politics and to provide the funding needed for additional U.S. Border Patrol agents, more asylum officers, fentanyl detection technology and more.” Proponents of sanctuary policies argue that they are not obligated to help federal immigration enforcement and that it can encourage otherwise-lawful illegal immigrants to talk to police if they do not fear deportation. As a result, there are now sanctuary jurisdictions across the U.S. GEORGIA MURDER SUSPECT CONFIRMED TO BE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT As a presidential candidate in 2020, Biden had appeared supportive of such policies In a March 2020 Democratic presidential primary, Biden answered “no” when asked if “undocumented immigrants” arrested by local police should be turned over to immigration officials. In his first days in office, Biden’s administration announced a 100-day moratorium on all deportations, which was eventually blocked by a federal judge. It also reversed Trump-era limits on DOJ funding grants that were tied to cooperation with immigration enforcement, meaning that they excluded sanctuary cities. But Biden’s ICE has continued to criticize sanctuary cities that do not cooperate with them. Acting ICE Director Patrick Lechleitner recently told Fox News that such jurisdictions are “inherently more unsafe.” “It is a concern, and I’m very baffled by it,” he said. DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas previously told mayors in 2022 that he would be seeking to convince leaders to change their policies. “Some of your cities, by reason of past history, have declined to cooperate with immigration authorities in the removal, the apprehension and removal of individuals, even if those individuals pose a public safety threat. And I do not mean to suggest that distrust, if that is one of the concerns underlying policies such as that, I don’t mean to do assert that that distrust is not earned,” he told the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Mayorkas emphasized that under the administration, immigration enforcement is limited to recent border crosses, public safety threats and national security threats unlike under the Trump administration. “But what I want to communicate to you is that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, the agency of today and what it is focused upon, and what it is doing, is not the agency of the past. We are not engaged in indiscriminate enforcement, but we are focused on making our communities safe and allowing those who have been contributors to it and productive members of it, to allow them to continue in their contributions and their productivity,” he said. “And so, I will be coming to you and asking you to reconsider your position of non-cooperation and see how we can work together,” he said. There are some indications that some sanctuary city leaders are now reconsidering their positions. NYC Mayor Eric Adams has said multiple times this week that he wants to soften the policy. “I don’t believe people who are violent in our city and commit repeated crimes should have the privilege of being in our city,” Adams said on Tuesday. He added, “You don’t have the right to be in our city and tarnish the overwhelming number who are here following the rules.”
Supreme Court divided over gun rights challenge to Trump bump stock ban
Austin gun store owner Michael Cargill challenged the ban on the devices used in major mass killings after he was forced to surrender two bump stocks.
New York Appeals court allows Trump, sons to continue running business, denies request to delay payment
A New York Appeals Court judge has denied former President Trump’s request to delay payment of the $464 million owed to the state after Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit, but said he will temporarily allow the 2024 frontrunner and his sons to continue running their business during the appeals process. Trump and his sons, Donald Jr. and Eric Trump, were barred earlier this month from operating their business in New York for a range of two to three years. Trump was also found liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages in the civil fraud case brought against him, his family and the Trump Organization by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The former president is appealing the ruling. On Wednesday, though, a New York Appeals Court judge ruled that the former president must post a bond for the full amount of the judgment and the independent director of compliance will be appointed. The judge will temporarily allow Trump and his sons to continue running the business as they appeal the decision. The filing is a temporary order before the motion goes before the full Appeals Court. Letitia James’ brief to the panel is due March 11, and Trump’s replies are due March 18. This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Supreme Court divided over federal ban on bump stock gun accessory
The Supreme Court offered divided thoughts and a measure of confusion on Wednesday over whether the federal government can ban so-called bump stocks, a device that increases the firepower of automatic weapons. The case, Garland v. Cargill, presents whether a “bump stock” device is a “machine gun” as defined by federal law because it is designed and intended for use in converting a rifle into a weapon that fires “automatically more than one shot… by a single function of the trigger.” After a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that left 60 people dead and 500 more wounded, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued an interpretive rule concluding that “bump stocks” are machine guns. The Trump administration initiated a ban on the devices – reversing earlier regulations – and the Biden Justice Department is now defending it in court. GOP SENATOR INTRODUCES BILL TO DEFEND GUN DEALERS FROM BIDEN’S ‘GUN-GRABBING AGENDA’: ‘EXTREMIST POLICIES’ Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas Gun Works, sued the government after he was forced to surrender several “bump stocks” under the ATF’s rule. He says the agency overstepped its administrative authority to impose a ban, absent any congressional action. “It really goes back to… freedom. And it goes back to just the basics of something that my customers and myself legally purchase. The government should not have that power, that authority in an administrative agency… to come back and ban that. You know, something that Congress has not banned. That’s going to be a job that’s reserved for Congress,” Cargill said in an interview with Fox News Digital. The conservative high court majority has been generally supportive of the Second Amendment in recent years, and several justices suggested the government here overstepped its power. But the nearly 90 minutes of oral arguments signaled the nine-member bench viewed the case as more about regulatory authority and less about expanded gun rights. The justices’ questions were focused mainly on exactly how bump stocks work, and their functional effect. “I can certainly understand why these items should be made illegal, but we’re dealing with a statute that was enacted in the 1930s, and through many administrations, the government took the position that these bump stocks are not machine guns,” said Justice Neil Gorsuch. “And then you adopted an interpretive rule, not even a legislative rule, saying otherwise that would render between a quarter of a million and a half million people federal felons.” Justice Samuel Alito called that “disturbing.” “These are the kind of weapons that Congress was intending to prohibit because of the damage they cause,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. “It’s really not about the operation of the thing. It’s about what it can achieve, what it’s being used for… The function of this trigger is to cause this kind of damage, 800 rounds a second or whatever.” A bump stock is an attachment that replaces an automatic weapon’s standard stock, the part of the long weapon that rests on the shoulder. TEXAS GUN STORE OWNER SAYS SUPREME COURT SHOULD LIMIT GOVERNMENT ‘POWER’ IN ‘BUMP STOCK’ BAN CASE As the shooter applies forward thrust on the barrel, the device harnesses the recoil energy so that the trigger will “bump” against the stationary finger, which then allows another round to be fired. The effect is more rapid shots than with a standard stock, up to 800 bullets a minute. Bump stocks came into circulation early this century, one of a number of devices that can be attached to automatic weapons. The carnage at the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival in Nevada – where the gunman fired more than a thousand rounds from 14 semi-automatic rifles outfitted with bump stocks – prompted the Trump administration to quickly ban them. GUN OWNERS DUNK ON SHAQ FOR SPONSORING FIREARM BUYBACK EVENT IN RED STATE: ‘ABSOLUTELY NOT’ Before that, the ATF for more than a decade had determined the devices did not convert them into machine guns, which have been illegal to own for nearly a century. The ATF says more than a half-million bump stocks were in circulation when the federal ban came into effect five years ago, requiring them to be turned in or destroyed. The focus of arguments came down to a technical inquiry into how gun triggers are enhanced by the addition of a bump stock. Several on the court admitted watching videos of bump stocks in a simulated environment, as part of the briefs submitted in the case. Both sides presented radically different ideas of just how these accessories work. The government told the justices bump stocks allow a gun user to fire “automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” Lawyers for the gun dealer argued that despite enhancing the firepower, the effect was still a manual, not an automatic function. “The entire point of this device is that you exert forward pressure and you have your finger on the trigger, and then a torrent of bullets shoots out,” said Justice Elena Kagan. “So I don’t understand why it’s any different from pushing a button and holding the trigger.” After attorney Jonathan Mitchell suggested bump stocks might help someone with a medical condition, Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked, “Why would even a person with arthritis, why would Congress think they needed to shoot 400 to 7- or 800 rounds of ammunition under any circumstance?” But other questions from the bench went back to what legislators have not done on this issue. “Intuitively I am entirely sympathetic to your argument, and it seems it’s functioning like a machine gun would,” said Justice Amy Coney Barrett, “but looking at that definition, the question is, why didn’t Congress pass that legislation to cover this more clearly?” The technical analysis undertaken during arguments was not without its hiccups. “This is totally confusing,” said Alito at one point. Jackson used the same word on several other occasions. “Now I’m completely lost,” added Sotomayor at one point. Cargill, an Army veteran, is