On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal regulation requiring, among other things, that those who make or sell “ghost guns” or “gun kits” must mark their products with serial numbers, keep records of their sales, and conduct background checks on buyers. The regulation, first enacted in 2022 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives came in response to a sharp increase in the number of unmarked guns being found at crime scenes around the country, from about 1,600 in 2017 to 19,000 in 2021. Gun manufacturers opposed the Biden-era regulation, arguing that multiple gun parts is not a gun. Writing for the majority in Bondi v. VanDerStok, Justice Neil Gorsuch said the ATF was within its authority under the broad language of the 1968 Gun Control Act to enact the regulation, noting that many gun kits are easy to assemble in less than an hour. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, and wrote separately. Read on for more criminal law news.
HDMI dissent. In another firearm-related case, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a California law limiting gun magazine capacity to ten or fewer rounds. In what appears to be a first, a judge on the en banc panel shared a video as part of his dissent. In the video, the judge appears dressed in his robes in his chambers, and goes over the different components of multiple handguns displayed on a table. Speaking from his desk, with a mounted AK-47 displayed on the wall behind him, he says “it became clear to me that many, including both California’s counsel and my colleagues in the majority of this case, lack the basic familiarity with handguns to understand the inherent shortcomings and obvious inadministrability of the test that California was proposing….” The majority noted in its opinion that it was not considering the factual information introduced in the dissent because it was outside the factual record presented to the court. In a concurring opinion, Senior Judge Marsha Berzon criticized the video, writing the “wildly improper video presentation warrants additional comment, lest the genre proliferate.”
El Paso District Attorney takes death off the table. On Tuesday, El Paso District Attorney James Montoya announced that the gunman who killed 23 people in an attack targeting Hispanic shoppers near the U.S.-Mexico border in 2019 could avoid the death penalty in the state case by pleading guilty. Motivated by a majority of the victims’ relatives who want the case behind them, Montoya said “this is about allowing the families of the 23 victims who lost their lives on that horrific day—and the 22 wounded—to finally have resolution in our court system.” (In the related federal case, prosecutors took the death penalty off the table, and in 2023 the shooter was sentenced to 90 consecutive life sentences after pleading guilty.) Montoya said that, under the plea offer, the shooter would plead guilty to capital murder and receive life in prison with no possibility for parole. The plea hearing and sentencing are scheduled for April 21, at which time families will have the opportunity to give victim impact statements.
Legislation aims at lap dogs, distracted driving. Earlier this week, proposed legislation in North Carolina prohibiting people from holding their pets or having pets in their laps while driving received bipartisan support during a legislative committee meeting. House Bill 394 would make it an infraction, punishable by a fine of $100 and court costs, for a person to drive while holding an animal or allowing the animal to sit in their lap, or while interacting with an animal or a child in a way that distracts the driver and results in driving that is “careless, reckless, or heedless.” The law, if enacted, would join other distracted driving measures already in place, such as the prohibition on texting or writing emails while driving, or the prohibition on drivers under 18 using a phone while driving unless they are talking to a parent or are in an emergency situation. A separate bill currently in the senate, Senate Bill 526, would prohibit any use of a cell phone or other communications device while driving. At this stage, both bills require approval from their respective Rules Committees before proceeding to their full chambers.
Ticketing driverless cars? Yes way. Alphabet’s Waymo autonomous vehicles are driverless taxis operating in multiple cities around the country. In San Francisco, Waymo has over 300 vehicles working at all hours transporting passengers around the city, and it turns out, also picking up quite the parking ticket bill. In 2024, Waymo vehicles received 589 tickets for parking violations, incurring over $65,000 in fines. The violations include obstructing traffic, disobeying street cleaning restrictions, and parking in prohibited areas. A Waymo spokesman said that Waymo is committed to paying the fines, and is continually refining its ability to avoid parking citations. They also highlighted that safety is their highest priority, particularly when picking up and dropping off passengers. As for moving violations, because those have to be issued to an actual human, it does appear that for now Waymo vehicles are immune from enforcement action (I should note: Waymo vehicle are designed to pull over if signaled by law enforcement).
Diamond(s) in the rough. Jaythan Gilder, 32, was arrested on February 26 on suspicion of first-degree grand theft and third-degree robbery with a mask in Orlando, Florida. Gilder, accused of stealing two pairs of Tiffany & Company diamond earrings worth close to $800,000, was seen swallowing the earrings while he was being taken into custody. When an x-ray confirmed the foreign objects in his midsection, he was taken to the hospital. There, he waited with law enforcement until they were “expelled from his system.” After the earrings were recovered, law enforcement took them back to Tiffany & Company where they were cleaned, inspected, and confirmed to be the stolen earrings. The store did not respond to a phone call seeking comment by the New York Times, and it is not clear what is now to become of the earrings. I for one am looking forward to The Ethicist’s reply to the inevitable question: “The Tiffany’s earrings I bought for my partner were significantly discounted – do I have to tell them why?”
Unexpected jail-time for assault changes motorsport history. Last week, ex-Formula 1 team boss and one of the greatest independent constructors in the sport Eddie Jordan passed away. In the early 1990’s, a surprise jail sentence led Jordan to unsuspectingly make one of the most influential decisions in the sport’s history. In December of 1990, Jordan’s driver Bertrand Gachot got into a fight with a London cab driver and was charged with assault. Sentencing was continued to August of 1991 – the middle of the race season. Gachot expected “a slap on the wrist or a fine…I had asked multiple lawyers about it, and they all said the same, but the judge wanted to make an example.” The example? Eighteen months in prison. Suddenly without a driver, Jordan had to scramble to fill the seat. He ended up picking a young German reserve driver who had never yet driven in F1: Michael Schumacher. Schumacher’s performance that weekend earned him a full-time seat by the very next race, and in his ensuing career he went on to win a record-setting seven world championship titles. At the time of his retirement, a few of his many records included most wins, most pole positions, most podium finishes, and most fastest laps (a record he still holds today).