1. A U.S. appeals court has struck down a rule adopted by the Trump administration following a 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting that banned "bump stocks," devices that allow people to rapidly fire multiple rounds from semi-automatic guns.
2. The court ruled that despite public pressure, it was up to Congress rather than the president to take action on the ban.
3. The ruling raises the prospect of the Supreme Court eventually deciding the issue, as three other federal appeals courts have rejected challenges to the ban and President Joe Biden's administration also supports it.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy in its reporting of facts and events related to the U.S. appeals court striking down a rule banning bump stocks, which are devices that allow people to rapidly fire multiple rounds from semi-automatic guns. It provides clear information about what happened, who was involved, and why it happened, as well as providing quotes from relevant sources such as judges and organizations involved in litigating the case.
The article does not appear to be biased or one-sided in its reporting; it presents both sides of the argument fairly and objectively without promoting any particular point of view or agenda. It also does not make unsupported claims or omit important points of consideration; all claims made are supported by evidence provided in the article itself or by quotes from relevant sources such as judges and organizations involved in litigating the case.
The only potential issue with this article is that it does not explore counterarguments or present both sides equally; while it does provide some information about those who oppose the ban on bump stocks, there is no detailed exploration of their arguments or perspectives on why they oppose it. However, this is likely due to space constraints rather than any bias on behalf of the author or publication, so overall this article can be considered reliable and trustworthy in its reporting of facts and events related to this issue.