What to know about the bump stocks Supreme Court ruling

The US Supreme Court has thrown out of federal ban on a controversial gun accessory. The court voted six to three to allow the sale of bump stocks. Bump stocks helped give a rifle the firing capabilities of a machine gun. They were outlawed by the Trump administration following the Las Vegas mass shooting in 2017. Let's bring in CBS News legal contributor and Loyola law professor Jessica Levinson to discuss this. So Jessica, in the opinion Justice Thomas wrote quote, a bump stock does not convert a semi automatic rifle into a machine gun anymore than a shooter with a lightning fast trigger finger does. How did the justices, the majority arrive at this decision and what are the justices in dissent say? So the justices in the majority, as you said, it basically comes down to semi automatic weapon plus bump stock does not equal machine gun. Why does that matter? Because under federal law, machine guns can be prohibited. And so the entire basis of this opinion, the 63 majority opinion is that bump stocks and it's fairly technical don't truly transform those semi automatic weapons. And the opinion got into really detailed things like whether or not how you have to hold your finger on the trigger and how much pressure you have to give and whether or not you have to keep releasing the trigger. All of those things went into their assessment both during oral arguments. And then we see it here in the opinion as to whether or not, again, bump stocks could be prohibited. And the dissent said it was a very different view. So Justice Sotomayor, writing for the dissent, focused on the real world consequences of of bump stocks and started out right away with the tragedies that we have experienced as a result of people being able to add bump stocks to semi automatic weapons. I mean, I think the punchline here for a lot of people listening, thinking it's a conservative Supreme Court striking down another gun control restriction, they're really saying the ATF, you went out of your lane. Congress could, if they wanted to as a legislative matter, decide to ban bump stocks. And Jessica, there's another gun related issue before the court. What's at stake there? Totally different issue. So that case, the Rahimi case that's coming up deals with the Second Amendment. It's not an interpretation as to whether or not an executive agency, the ATF went too far afield, went beyond the scope of its power in the new case. The next case, I should say, the question is whether or not somebody subject to a domestic violence restraining order can be prohibited under federal law from owning a gun. And what he's arguing there is he's looking at a recent decision that the court made in a case called Bruin, where the court made it more difficult to uphold gun control restrictions. And he's saying, under that new standard, the restriction that I was found to violate is not constitutional. And so we're waiting for that case. That case was argued back in November. So I think we can potentially expect to see that case next week. OK, Jessica Levinson, thank you.