The Department of Justice refused Wednesday to appeal a ruling that found National Firearms Act (NFA) restrictions on suppressors and other items unconstitutional because the removal of associated taxes invalidated the law, marking a significant victory for gun-rights advocates.
Republican Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde posted on X Wednesday that the Trump administration confirmed it would not appeal a ruling by United States District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas, a Trump appointee, granting a motion for summary judgement from attorneys representing the Silencer Shop Foundation in a 66-page opinion issued August 5. Hendrix ruled that since taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and other items had been reduced to $0 by legislation signed by President Donald Trump in July 2025, the registration and paperwork imposed by the NFA exceeded Congress’ authority under the taxation power.
Gun-rights groups celebrated DOJ’s decision not to appeal the ruling, which means that people purchasing suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and devices that were described as “any other weapon” no longer have to fill out an ATF form or register the items.
“GOA fought to crush the NFA’s unconstitutional restrictions through the One Big Beautiful Bill, but we didn’t stop there,” Gun Owners of America Senior Vice President Erich Pratt said in a statement. “We promised to keep fighting until these restrictions were gone, and now our members are putting the historic victory into action. The era of federal registration for constitutionally protected arms must end.”
After the Senate parliamentarian struck language that removed those items from NFA’s purview during the passage of the July 2025 reconciliation bill, Congress reduced the taxes to $0. Gun-rights groups filed suits challenging the applicability of the law shortly after the legislation was signed.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled on June 18 in Comeaux v. United States that suppressors fall under the category of “arms” and are protected under the Second Amendment, but that the NFA operates akin to a “shall issue” concealed-carry permit law, in which authorities are required to grant the permit if certain criteria are met, and allowed a conviction for possessing an unregistered suppressor to stand.
“The Department respects Americans’ Second Amendment rights and is currently assessing the impact of the court’s ruling,” a DOJ spokeswoman told the DCNF. A DOJ official added that the DOJ would not seek a stay of the judge’s decision, noting that people often conflate appeals and requests for a stay.
While some Second Amendment advocates have expressed frustration over the Trump administration defending some gun laws, notably the NFA, from legal challenges, a top administration official told the DCNF that the criticism was misplaced.
“I understand people have policy differences with DOJ’s enforcement of federal laws, but, in my opinion, and I’ve said this to many gun groups, the appropriate place to launch those policy discussions is in Congress, not with us,” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Right Harmeet Dhillon told the DCNF during a June interview. “We have, I mean, not me, but other people in this building regularly respond to all kinds of litigation on behalf of the United States where I don’t necessarily agree with what we’re defending.”
(DCNF)
