FILE - Several types of weapons, including AR-15 style rifles, are displayed at a gun shop in Virginia. (Photo: Diaa Bekheet)
FILE - Several types of weapons, including AR-15 style rifles, are displayed at a gun shop in Virginia. (Photo: Diaa Bekheet)

A U.S. appeals court on Monday refused to halt President Donald Trump’s ban on “bump stocks” - rapid-fire gun attachments used in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history - in the latest courtroom defeat for firearms rights advocates opposing the policy.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a lower court ruling that denied a request by opponents of the policy for a preliminary injunction lifting the ban, which took effect last week. The U.S. Supreme Court twice last week, in cases from Michigan and Washington, D.C., rejected stay requests from gun rights advocates.

FILE - A little-known device called a "bump stock" is attached to a semi-automatic rifle at the Gun Vault store and shooting range, in South Jordan, Utah, Oct. 4, 2017. The device was used by Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock.
Trump Administration Moves to Ban Bump Stocks
The Trump administration moved Tuesday to officially ban bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire rapidly like automatic firearms, and has made them illegal to possess beginning in late March.The devices will be banned under a federal law that prohibits machine guns, according to a senior Justice Department official.Bump stocks became a focal point of the national gun control debate after they were used in October 2017 when a man opened fired from his Las Vegas hotel suite into a crowd…

The policy was embraced by Trump in the wake of an October 2017 mass shooting that killed 58 people at a country music festival in Las Vegas. It requires owners to turn in or destroy the attachments. People caught in possession of them could face up to 10 years in prison.

The appeals court previously carved out a temporary exception to the ban for members of the Firearms Policy Foundation and other organizations pursuing the legal challenge.

A rifle is displayed at a Firearms Supercenter in
A rifle is displayed at a Firearms Supercenter in Virginia. (Photo: Diaa Bekheet)

In Monday’s decision, the court said it would extend that temporary reprieve for two days to allow the plaintiffs to seek a stay from the U.S. Supreme Court.

“We are reviewing the decision and will be seeking a stay from the Supreme Court, within the time contemplated by the D.C. Circuit,” said Erik Jaffe, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.

Bump stocks use a gun’s recoil to bump its trigger, enabling a semiautomatic weapon to fire hundreds of rounds per minute, which can transform it into a machine gun. The ban is a rare recent instance of gun control at the federal level in a country that has experienced a succession of mass shootings.

FILE - Emma Gonzalez, a survivor of the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., closes her eyes and cries as she stands silently at the podium for the amount of time it took the Parkland shooter to go on his killing s
Parkland Attack Fueled Big Shift in America's Gun Politics
Last year's shooting at a Florida high school sparked a movement among a younger generation angered by gun violence and set the stage for a significant shift in America's gun politics. Thousands of student protesters took to the streets and inspired hashtags such as #NeverAgain and #Enough. They also mobilized to register a new generation of voters. Candidates were emboldened too. Many of them confronted the issue in last year's elections and were rewarded with victory over incumbents supported by…

Those challenging the policy have argued that the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) lacks the authority to equate bump stocks with machine guns. One of the laws at the center of the legal dispute was written more than 80 years ago, when Congress restricted access to machine guns during the heyday of American gangsters’ use of “tommy guns.”

The appeals court, in its 2-1 ruling, said in Monday’s decision that gun rights activists had failed to show that ATF acted unreasonably when it reinterpreted the language to include bump stocks. The judge who dissented in the ruling, Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson, said that “the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their challenge and I would grant them preliminary injunctive relief.”