What’s at stake in the Supreme Court case on whether gun manufacturers have to disclose if they sell to felons

The justices are considering whether to hear an appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which ruled that a gun manufacturer could not be compelled to sell guns to anyone who is not licensed to do so.

The ruling came as a surprise to gun owners and gun-control advocates who were waiting for the court to rule on the issue before a November election.

Gun owners and advocates for gun rights say they were looking forward to a case that would give gun manufacturers more protection from the government and gun control advocates a chance to win the fight.

But the ruling could open the door to a massive backlash from gun owners, which could threaten the very safety of America. 

The ruling, announced Thursday, will be heard by the D.C. Circuit’s nine judges, with a three-judge panel ruling on the case due next month.

The D.S., D.F., and the U to the court, with one judge being appointed by former President Barack Obama and two judges being appointed jointly by former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Donald Trump. 

Gun manufacturers say that the court ruling will give them more flexibility in how they market guns to the public, and will give gun owners the chance to stop federal regulations that are already forcing gun manufacturers to disclose the identities of their salespeople to potential customers. 

“If this court rules in favor of gun owners it will allow more companies to do what they have been doing and sell guns without fear of government regulation,” said John Feinblatt, the former general counsel of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and a prominent gun rights advocate. 

Federal gun-regulations currently prohibit gun manufacturers from selling guns to those who are prohibited from owning guns, including felons.

The court ruling could allow the government to impose more restrictions on gun sales, including requirements that gun buyers reveal their Social Security numbers, criminal history information and other personal information, in order to obtain a license to sell firearms to them. 

In a statement released Thursday, a spokesman for the DFCE said, “The DFCEs determination that the DRCS [Department of Justice’s Bureau of Consumer Protection] did not violate Section 2 of the Lanham Act by requiring firearm manufacturers to provide information about their salesperson to customers is supported by the Supreme Courts decisions in this case.” 

The DRCP also said in a statement that the Court has made clear that its decision is not inconsistent with the Court of Claims decision in United States v.

National Rifle Association, which held that the government cannot compel gun dealers to turn over customers’ Social Security and other details.

“The Court of Disputed Returns has recognized that gun dealers should have a way to provide their customers with the same level of privacy protection as those for which they provide the gun,” the statement said. 

Last month, the NRA issued a statement calling the ruling “a big win for law-abiding gun owners.”

“We are pleased the Supreme court will allow a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment, while ensuring that no gun manufacturer is forced to disclose any information about gun sales,” the NRA said.

“This is an important win for gun owners across the country.” 

But some gun-rights advocates were disappointed that the decision did not give them the same protection. 

A ruling by the court would have allowed gun manufacturers the same privacy protections as gun sellers, the National Shooting Sports Foundation said in an email. 

For now, gun manufacturers are not in a position to force gun sellers to share their sales information. 

But the ruling is unlikely to have a significant impact on gun owners. 

Under the federal law, gun sellers can’t require gun buyers to reveal their names or other personal identifying information about them.

So if a gun buyer asks the seller for that information, the seller is required to turn it over, even if the buyer has not consented to the disclosure. 

As a result, gun owners have a better shot of finding out who sold to whom without revealing personal details, according to the National Rifle Assn. 

Still, it’s not clear what the impact of a ruling by a three judge panel on gun manufacturers would be. 

On Friday, the DDCU was the only court in the country to rule that gun sellers cannot be required to disclose sales information about guns to a buyer, even when a person has consented. 

It’s possible that the ruling will spur a wave of gun manufacturers in the United States, which are already struggling to comply with federal gun-safety rules.