A federal judge has gutted the National Firearms Act's registration requirements for gun suppressors, and for the first time since 1934, Americans walked out of a Texas gun shop with silencers and no federal paperwork.
U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, a Trump appointee, ruled on August 5 that the NFA's registration and approval requirements for suppressors lost their constitutional basis once Congress zeroed out the $200 making and transfer tax through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The permanent injunction blocks federal officials from enforcing those requirements against the plaintiffs, Gun Owners of America, the Silencer Shop Foundation, and their members and customers.
Just after midnight Thursday, two gun owners, Brandon Herrera and Texas state Rep. Wes Virdell, walked into Silencer Shop in Leander, Texas, and acquired suppressors without NFA registration. Gun Owners of America called it the first lawful transfer of its kind in 92 years. Before the ruling, the same act carried a penalty of up to 10 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine per violation.
The chain of events traces back to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which reduced the NFA's making and transfer taxes to $0 for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and certain other weapons, effective January 1, 2026. Republicans had initially pushed for broader NFA deregulation during the 2025 reconciliation process, but the Senate parliamentarian, a nonpartisan rules referee, blocked portions of that effort under the budget rules that govern reconciliation bills.
Gun Owners of America and the Silencer Shop Foundation filed suit the same day President Trump signed the bill into law. Their argument was straightforward: the NFA's registration and approval machinery existed to collect a tax. Once Congress eliminated that tax, the regulatory apparatus had no constitutional leg to stand on.
The Justice Department countered that the remaining regulations could be sustained under other NFA taxes still in effect and under Congress's authority to regulate interstate commerce. AP News reported that the NFA had been upheld for nearly 90 years under Congress's taxing power, a foundation Judge Hendrix found no longer applied.
Fifteen states joined the legal challenge as plaintiffs, though the specific states were not identified in the ruling's public reporting.
Hendrix's ruling permanently bars federal enforcement of the challenged NFA provisions against the plaintiffs, their members, and their customers. But he declined to issue a nationwide injunction, meaning the ruling's direct reach is limited to those covered parties. He also declined to rule on a separate Second Amendment argument raised by the plaintiffs.
In his opinion, Hendrix wrote plainly about the limits of his own authority. Fox News Digital reported the judge's statement:
"Efforts to render the NFA constitutional must come from Congress, not this Court."
That line cuts both ways. It tells gun-control advocates that the judiciary will not rescue a regulatory framework Congress itself undermined. And it tells gun-rights groups that any further expansion of the ruling, to cover all gun owners nationwide, or to address the Second Amendment question directly, will require either additional litigation or legislative action.
The Trump administration's response to the ruling has been telling. Rep. Andrew Clyde, the Georgia Republican who helped write the legislation that set the stage for the case, said Wednesday he received confirmation from the Trump administration that the DOJ would not appeal. Just The News reported Clyde's statement directly:
"I've received confirmation from the Trump Administration that the DOJ will NOT appeal our historic court victory against the NFA."
Whether DOJ has formally filed a notice of non-appeal or whether Clyde's statement remains the sole public confirmation is unclear from available reporting. The administration has not issued a separate formal statement on the ruling.
Clyde attended the midnight transfers at Silencer Shop in Leander and did not hold back. He called the ruling "literally, the greatest Second Amendment win in the history of our country" and "a monumental day for the country and a monumental day for the Second Amendment." That kind of language from a sitting congressman who helped craft the underlying law carries weight, he is not a bystander commenting on someone else's victory.
GOA's director of federal affairs, Aidan Johnston, framed the significance in practical terms in an interview with Fox News Digital:
"This is the first time in 92 years that any gun owner has been able to do this. Previously, this would have been punishable by up to 10 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine per violation. So, this was a big federal law. We took a really big bite out of it."
Johnston also explained the legal logic in plain language. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act did not fully repeal the NFA. It reduced the 1934 tax from $200 to $0. As Johnston put it: "I think all of us could understand there's no such thing as a $0 tax. It doesn't raise any revenue. It's not a tax."
The broader pattern of Trump DOJ legal maneuvers working in tandem with legislative strategy has produced results across multiple policy areas. In this case, the legislative action created the opening, and the DOJ's decision not to appeal sealed the outcome.
GOA senior vice president Erich Pratt issued a statement tying the courtroom win to the group's broader campaign:
"GOA fought to crush the NFA's unconstitutional restrictions through the One Big Beautiful Bill, but we didn't stop there. We promised to keep fighting until these restrictions were gone, and now our members are putting the historic victory into action."
Pratt added a line that signals where gun-rights groups intend to push next: "The era of federal registration for constitutionally protected arms must end."
Breitbart reported that the case is styled Jensen v. ATF and that the Trump DOJ and ATF declined to appeal within the seven-day window, allowing the ruling to take effect on August 13, 2026. Silencer Shop completed the first lawful, unregistered suppressor transfer that day, a fact GOA confirmed publicly.
The Second Amendment Foundation, a separate gun-rights organization, also weighed in on the ruling's broader implications. The group said the decision "will set a precedent we can now argue in courts across the country to allow Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights without fear of being placed on some government registry."
That ambition, taking a ruling that covers GOA members and Silencer Shop customers and extending it to every gun owner in the country, remains untested. Judge Hendrix explicitly refused to issue a nationwide injunction. But with the DOJ declining to appeal, gun-rights organizations now hold a favorable ruling they can cite in future challenges across other federal districts.
The ruling also raises questions beyond suppressors. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act zeroed out the NFA tax on short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and certain other weapons. The Washington Examiner reported that the injunction covers those categories as well, though the initial transfers at Silencer Shop involved only suppressors.
Courts have played an increasingly visible role in shaping policy outcomes on both sides of the aisle. From redistricting battles in Florida to age-verification laws in Texas, federal and state judges are resolving disputes that legislatures either cannot or will not settle on their own. The NFA ruling fits squarely in that pattern, Congress changed the tax, and a federal judge drew the constitutional conclusion.
Several open questions hang over the ruling. The injunction protects GOA members, Silencer Shop customers, and named plaintiffs. Gun owners outside those groups who attempt to acquire suppressors without NFA registration could still face federal prosecution, at least until another court extends the reasoning or Congress acts.
Judge Hendrix's refusal to address the Second Amendment argument also leaves a major constitutional question for another day. Gun-rights groups had urged the court to rule that the Second Amendment independently protects the right to own suppressors, regardless of the tax question. Hendrix passed on that issue, writing that it "must come from Congress, not this Court."
The Trump administration's broader approach to DOJ priorities has drawn attention for its willingness to decline enforcement or appeal in cases that align with the president's policy goals. The decision not to fight the NFA ruling fits that pattern. Whether it holds through any future administration change is another matter entirely.
For now, the practical reality is concrete. Two men walked into a gun shop in a small Texas city just after midnight, bought suppressors, and walked out without filling out NFA paperwork. Ninety-two years of federal registration requirements did not stop them, because a federal judge said those requirements no longer have a constitutional reason to exist.
When Congress took the tax away, it took the justification with it. The gun-rights groups that saw the opening and moved fast deserve the credit, and the left, which spent decades treating the NFA as settled law, now has to reckon with the fact that their own colleagues' legislative carelessness helped bring it down.
