Twice as Nice: FPC, SAF, NRA, ASA File Second Suit Challenging Legality of the National Firearms Act

President Trump signed the Big Beautiful Bill into law on July 4. Among other things, the B³ eliminated the $200 tax on transfers of suppressors, SBRs and SBSs under the National Firearms Act. In other words the legal justification that had been used to defend the NFA for almost a century — that it was just a tax that happened to have a bunch of highly intrusive compliance and registration features attached —  was gone.

Not letting any grass grow under their feet, a group of plaintiffs that included Silencer Shop, GOA, SilencerCo, Palmetto State Armory and others filed a lawsuit on July 5 challenging the constitutionality of the NFA in the gun-friendly Northern District of Texas in the Fifth Circuit. That complaint, however, is no longer alone.

Yesterday another group headed by the FPC, SAF, NRA and the American Suppressor Association filed another challenge to the NFA in the Eastern District of Missouri in the also gun-friendly Eighth Circuit. As the plaintiffs state in their complaint . . .

This regulatory regime [of the NFA] no longer comports with Congress’s constitutionally enumerated powers. While the NFA’s regulations may have been permissible in support of the statute’s taxes on making and transferring firearms, that justification no longer remains for items whose making and transfer are no longer taxed. To the extent that the NFA imposes requirements on making, transferring, receiving, possessing, or otherwise using untaxed firearms, it cannot be justified as an exercise of any other Article I power. Accordingly, the NFA is unconstitutional as to the untaxed firearms.

What could happen next? As our own LKB wrote after the first suit was filed  . . .

Imagine here that the plaintiffs move for a preliminary injunction [which they have]. The Trump DoJ then says (as it has in other cases recently), “You know, the plaintiffs are correct — this law is actually unconstitutional, and thus we won’t waste the court’s time or taxpayer dollars defending it or opposing the requested relief. Go ahead and enter judgment.”

Badda bing! That’s a binding federal judgment that the remaining NFA regulations on suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, and AOWs are toast, and thus cannot be enforced against the plaintiffs, their customers and their members.

The question now is, what will the Trump DOJ do in response to these two complaints? Will they defend the NFA, or will they stand aside and let one or both of the courts enter injunctions blocking enforcement while the cases play out? There may not be enough popcorn in the world for this.

Here’s FPC’s announcement of the suit . . .

[T]he Firearms Policy Coalition announced a major new lawsuit, Brown v. ATF, challenging the federal National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. FPC is joined in the case by two individuals and one retailer, as well as the American Suppressor Association, National Rifle Association, and Second Amendment Foundation. Key case documents for the lawsuit are available at firearmspolicy.org/brown.

This important case challenges the NFA on two separate grounds. First, the plaintiffs claim, the NFA exceeds the limited, enumerated powers granted to Congress in Article I of the Constitution. Moreover, they say, the NFA also violates the right to keep and bear arms protected under the Second Amendment. The challengers are seeking a declaratory judgment and an injunction against the government’s enforcement of the NFA with respect to some NFA firearms which are now untaxed due to the recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Brown closely follows FPC’s recently filed challenge to New Jersey’s ban on so-called “short-barreled rifles” in FPC v. Platkin, as well as its challenge to the NFA’s suppressor regulations in United States v. Peterson, and the end of the Biden ATF pistol brace ban rule that was vacated through FPC’s Mock v. Garland case.

“The National Firearms Act isn’t just unconstitutional, it’s a tyrannical abomination,” said Firearms Policy Coalition President Brandon Combs. “Not only does the NFA violate your Second Amendment rights, but Congress never had the lawful authority to pass it in the first place. That makes it a double abuse of power, violating both the right to keep and bear arms and the hard limits the Constitution places on the federal government. We’re proud to fight alongside our allies to end this corrupt, immoral law so peaceable Americans can exercise their rights when, where, and how they choose.”

“The National Firearms Act has been a weight around the neck of law-abiding gun owners for nearly a century,” said Knox Williams, President and Executive Director American Suppressor Association. “With the elimination of the excise tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and AOWs through the One Big Beautiful Bill, our lawsuit challenges the NFA as an unconstitutional registry of now untaxed firearms. Common sense and the law are on our side, and we look forward to fighting on behalf of all Americans in Federal Court.”

“The National Firearms Act has infringed on law-abiding Americans’ right to keep and bear arms for nearly a century,” said John Commerford, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action. “Congress took a major step by eliminating the NFA tax on suppressors and short-barreled firearms through the OBBB, and we’re proud to work alongside other leading Second Amendment organizations to finish the job.”

“The National Firearms Act’s registration scheme only exists to ensure that the tax on NFA firearms was paid,” said Adam Kraut, SAF’s Executive Director. “With Congress removing the tax on silencers, short-barreled firearms, and ‘any other weapons,’ the continued inclusion of these items in the NFA serves no purpose, except continuing to retain an impermissible hurdle to the exercise of one’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We look forward to relegating this unconstitutional law to the history books.”

To support this and dozens of other important lawsuits to end unconstitutional bans and eliminate gun control laws across the country, join the FPC Grassroots Army at JoinFPC.org.

The plaintiffs are represented by Cooper & Kirk. FPC thanks the FPC Action Foundation for its strategic support of this FPC Law case.