Judge Strikes Down NFA Registration [What It Means for Gun Owners]
A judge struck down parts of the NFA, but the ruling isn't in effect, doesn't cover everyone, and doesn't touch state law. We have the full breakdown.
We review products independently. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn a commission to help support our testing. Learn more.
A federal judge in Texas handed the 2A community a win, ruling that National Firearms Act regulations, without an associated tax, are unlawful.
U.S. District Court Judge James Wesley Hendrix issued the 66-page opinion on Wednesday on the combined cases of Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF.
Table of Contents
Trending: Best AR-15s, Best Pistol Red Dots, & Ammo in Stock
The Opinion
Gun advocates teamed up with manufacturers, gun rights groups, and 15 states to challenge the legality of the NFA after the One Big Beautiful Bill Act zeroed out the tax stamp fee.
The original filings pointed to a 1937 Supreme Court decision, Sonzinsky v. United States. In Sonzinsky, the High Court upheld the NFA’s constitutionality but also stated that a tax must “produce some revenue.”
Legal experts argued that without a tax, the government loses the authority to regulate.
Hendrix, presiding over the Northern District of Texas, agreed, issuing the injunction.
“Because today’s NFA does not generate any revenue from untaxed firearms, its regulatory provisions cannot be upheld under the taxing power,” Hendrix wrote.
“And there is no sign in the NFA’s text, structure, or statutory history that Congress invoked any other power in crafting the NFA provisions at issue. Thus, the regulatory provisions must be enjoined as unconstitutional because they exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”
Though the court did not rule on any Second Amendment issues, instead focusing solely on the tax/enumerated powers angle, the decision thrilled gun rights advocates.
The Second Amendment Foundation, who backed Jensen but was not a named plaintiff, called the injunction “a big win.”
“The basis for each lawsuit challenging the NFA registration scheme is the same – without the tax, the remaining requirements for the affected arms under the NFA have no constitutional basis,” Second Amendment Foundation Executive Director Adam Kraut said in a press release.
“And today the first court to rule on the issue has agreed with us. We’re eager to continue this fight and leave major portions of the NFA in the dustbin of history. A big win is a great way to kick things off.”
What This Means for Gun Owners
If the injunction takes full effect, it would stop the ATF from enforcing NFA requirements like Form 1 and Form 4 applications, fingerprints, etc. against the named plaintiffs.
That’s a big if and, in the meantime, it doesn’t mean sweeping nationwide changes.
“Nothing has changed in terms of their legal liability for violating NFA provisions," said Amy Swearer, Senior Legal Fellow at Advancing American Freedom.
"The order hasn't gone into effect. And it could be quite some time before it goes into effect — if it ever goes into effect at all."
The injunction is set to take effect on August 12, 2026, leaving time for the Trump Administration to request a stay pending appeal, but Swearer says that date doesn’t add up to much in practice.
The Best Gun Deals, Coupons and Finds
Subscribe to Pew Pew Tactical's sales and deals email.
"Realistically, the federal government will file an appeal before the stay ends," she said. "It will simultaneously ask the Fifth Circuit to impose its own stay while the appeal is pending, which will likely be granted. Then, it could be several more months before a Fifth Circuit panel releases an opinion."
And that isn’t even in the end of the road. The case could ultimately make it all the way to the Supreme Court.
"This was more like one battle in a much longer legal war," Swearer said.
Further, this isn’t a nationwide slam dunk. Even for the plaintiffs, there are still some restrictions.
A 2025 Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. CASA prohibits universal injunctions, so Hendrix’s injunction doesn’t remove NFA regulations nationwide even if it takes effect.
Instead, the injunction is limited to the named plaintiffs, their members, and their current/future customers. That means that joining an involved organization like Gun Owners of America or buying from one of the named dealers would, in theory, offer some protection under the injunction; only if the injunction holds, though.
Things don’t get less complicated either as the two consolidated cases don’t land on the same relief. Hendrix found that the Jensen side didn’t show standing to challenge Any Other Weapons, AOWs; however, Silencer Shop plaintiffs did establish standing, meaning Silencer Shop plaintiffs remain covered.
On the flip side, Jensen challenged two other provisions on unserialized NFA items that Silencer Shop didn’t, so only Jensen plaintiffs are included on that.
The ruling also doesn’t touch machine guns, destructive devices, or the $500/$1,000 special occupational tax on dealers, manufacturers, and importers.
Most important, the ruling has no bearing on state laws. So, gun owners in states with their own restriction on suppressors, SBRs, or other NFA items are out of luck.
"This ruling wouldn't be a 'get out of jail free' card with respect to state laws regulating or restricting the same items," Swearer said.
In the meantime, Swearer suggests business as usual for gun owners — don’t assume anything has changed.
"Every single person and retailer is still subject to the exact same NFA regulations they were subject to prior to this order," she explained. "We're talking about life-altering criminal consequences for guessing wrong."
Swearer said the best avenue for gun owners is to seek legal advice attorney licensed to practice in their particular state and who is knowledgeable specifically on NFA registration matters before doing anything that could be viewed as non-compliance with current NFA regulations.
Our Most Popular Posts
Will The Case Survive Appeal?
The federal government is expected to appeal, but that’s no necessarily bad news. The Fifth Circuit, which would hear the appeal, has a pro-gun track record.
"I do suspect that a majority of Fifth Circuit judges would be amenable to the plaintiffs' arguments about Congressional taxing power," Swearer said, "and that the government is going to have a bit of an uphill battle."
Swearer suspects the underlying strategy of zeroing out the tax rather than attempting to repeal the NFA provisions was intentional.
"Getting the necessary votes for repealing NFA regulations is far more difficult than passing a budget bill that zeroes out the tax and destabilizes the constitutional grounding for the rest of the zeroed out NFA provisions.”
But the battle isn’t completely won. Congress could undo the entire thing but reinstating something as simple as a token tax.
"It's difficult to see how even just making it a $0.01 tax wouldn't place these same provisions right back within the government's legitimate taxing power," Swearer said.
Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF
Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF sit at the center of the fight. The Silencer Shop case saw a host of gun industry juggernauts (including Silencer Shop Foundation, B&T USA, Palmetto State Armory, and SilencerCo Weapons Research) team up with 15 states (Texas, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming) and the Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, and the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition.
Jensen started with Texas gun owners John Jensen, Jeremy Neusch, and David Lynn Smith with Hot Shots Custom, LLC, and the Texas State Rifle Association, FPC Action Foundation, and the Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms supporting.
Both cases pushed back against the regulation requirements of the NFA and named Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the U.S Justice Department, and ATF Director Robert Cekada as defendants.
What would you grab if you didn’t have to jump through NFA hoops ? Let us know in the comments below. Want to get a jump start on shopping? Check out our articles on the Best AR Suppressors, Best Rimfire Suppressors, and Best Handgun Suppressors.
Additional Resources
- Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF
- Jensen v. ATF
- Sonzinsky v. United States
- Judge James Wesley Hendrix
- Second Amendment Foundation press release
- Advancing American Freedom
- NFA ATF
- Gun Owners of America Press Release
- Silencer Shop Foundation
- B&T USA
- Palmetto State Armory
- SilencerCo Weapons Research
- Gun Owners of America
- Gun Owners Foundation
- Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition
- Texas State Rifle Association
- FPC Action Foundation
- Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms