By: Armed Attorneys
For weeks, gun owners and federal firearms licensees have been asking the same question: Is ATF actually going to honor the federal court order that blocked enforcement of major portions of the National Firearms Act for protected parties?
We still do not have the formal ATF guidance everyone has been waiting for. But we now have two important pieces of evidence about how the agency is approaching the ruling.
First, multiple FFLs that transferred suppressors without using the traditional NFA Form 4 process have reportedly gone through ATF inspections without those transfers being cited as violations.
Second, ATF Director Robert Cekada has publicly stated that the agency is complying with the court’s order and will not take enforcement action against protected parties inconsistent with the ruling.
Neither development answers every remaining question. But together, they make the situation considerably less uncertain than it was immediately after the court’s injunction took effect.
Background
On August 5, 2026, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix issued a major decision in the consolidated cases of Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF.
The cases arose after Congress reduced the federal making and transfer taxes for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and certain other NFA firearms to zero. That created a constitutional problem for the government.
For decades, the NFA’s registration and approval system had been defended as part of Congress’s power to impose and collect taxes under Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Judge Hendrix concluded that once Congress eliminated the taxes on these firearms, the government could no longer use the taxing power to justify the regulatory machinery that had existed to support those taxes.
The court therefore held that the challenged NFA provisions exceeded Congress’s enumerated powers and permanently enjoined their enforcement against the plaintiffs and, where applicable, their members and customers. The court expressly declined to issue a nationwide injunction covering everyone.
The court initially stayed its ruling for seven days to give the government an opportunity to seek appellate relief. The government did not do so, and the injunction went into effect on August 13.
The Court Said What ATF Could Not Enforce. It Didn’t Give Dealers an Instruction Manual
The injunction removed several NFA requirements for covered transactions, but the Gun Control Act and other federal laws did not disappear.
For example, the court did not eliminate the ordinary federal background-check and dealer-record requirements applicable to suppressors. A suppressor transferred by an FFL under the injunction still requires an ATF Form 4473 and the ordinary Gun Control Act procedures applicable to the transaction. But dealers were left with some very practical questions.
What happens to a suppressor already recorded in an FFL’s NFA inventory? How should it be removed from the dealer’s NFA records if there is no Form 4? Where should the transaction appear in the dealer’s acquisition-and-disposition records? And, perhaps most importantly, what happens when an ATF Industry Operations Investigator eventually walks through the door and examines those records? ATF had not provided formal instructions answering those questions, but some FFLs decided to proceed anyway.
Four ATF Inspections and Zero Violations
John Crump at AmmoLand recently reported that at least four FFLs in four different regions of the country had undergone routine ATF inspections after conducting suppressor transfers using Form 4473 without requiring a Form 4 for transactions covered by the injunction.
According to AmmoLand’s sources, all four shops passed their inspections with zero violations, and the ATF Industry Operations Investigators did not treat the covered suppressor transfers as violations.
This is reporting based on sources who spoke to AmmoLand on condition of anonymity. ATF has not published an official inspection memorandum announcing that every dealer should follow exactly the same procedure.
Still, these were reportedly four separate inspections in four different areas of the country. That makes the development much harder to dismiss as one inspector making an isolated decision.
AmmoLand also reports that some dealers have handled their inventory records by marking suppressors as disposed of in their NFA records and moving them into their ordinary Gun Control Act records before completing the Form 4473 transfer. That procedure reportedly satisfied ATF inspectors in at least two states. Again, that is not the same thing as published ATF guidance. But it is our first meaningful look at how ATF inspectors are actually handling these transactions in the field.
Then the ATF Director Broke His Silence
The second development may be even more significant. On August 29, ATF Director Robert Cekada publicly addressed the controversy surrounding the Jensen and Silencer Shop Foundation ruling.
UPDATE>Jensen v. ATF
FACTS> CLICKBAIT.
There’s a lot of misinformation circulating about the recent NDTX ruling in Jensen v. ATF; including a headline claiming, “ATF is Furious and We Are Planning Brutal Revenge on Gun Owners.”
The source? You guessed it: unnamed anonymous sources. It’s completely FALSE.
**More importantly – ATF respects the Court’s ruling and the rule of law. We are following the order and will not take enforcement action against protected parties inconsistent with that ruling. We are working diligently on clear guidance. Getting it RIGHT matters more than getting it out fast.
That means carefully navigating federal and state laws so that manufacturers, FFLs, and law-abiding gun owners aren’t left with legal problems – today or under a future administration.
Thank you for your patience as we focus on developing the guidance. It will be posted online as soon as we are done. The American public and the 2A community deserve facts NOT clickbait.
His statement contained three important points.
First, Cekada said ATF is following the court’s order and will not take enforcement action against protected parties inconsistent with the ruling. Second, he confirmed that ATF is working on formal guidance. Third, he explained that the agency is examining the interaction between the court’s injunction and other federal and state laws before releasing that guidance. According to Cekada, the goal is to avoid leaving manufacturers, FFLs, and lawful gun owners with legal problems either today or under a future administration.
That last point is important because the court did not simply erase every federal law touching suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, or other NFA firearms.
The Gun Control Act remains in place. Certain NFA provisions were not included within the injunction. Interstate transportation and dealer-to-dealer transfers raise additional questions. And state laws vary dramatically, with some states tying lawful possession directly to federal NFA registration.
What About SBRs and Short-Barreled Shotguns?
This is also why gun owners should be careful about treating every firearm affected by the court’s ruling exactly like a suppressor. The injunction reaches important NFA provisions applicable to suppressors, SBRs, and SBSs. But another provision of federal law, such as 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(4), generally prohibits an FFL from transferring a short-barreled rifle or shotgun unless specifically authorized by the Attorney General. Historically, the NFA approval process supplied that authorization.
The Injunction Is Still Not Nationwide
The injunction protects the named plaintiffs and, depending on the particular plaintiff, their current and future members and customers. The court also made clear that customer protection associated with a commercial plaintiff or commercial member is tied to transactions with that covered business, it is not a blanket exemption from the NFA for every firearm the customer may possess.
The Government Can Still Appeal
The government declined to seek an emergency stay before the injunction became effective, but that was not the same thing as permanently giving up its right to appeal. The federal government has 60 days from the final judgment to file a notice of appeal. Because of how that deadline falls on the calendar, the current deadline is October 5, 2026.
Could the government still appeal? Yes. Does Director Cekada’s statement guarantee that it will not? No. But this is not necessarily a straight line toward an appeal either.
ATF is publicly saying that it is complying with the injunction. Dealers conducting covered suppressor transfers are reportedly passing ATF inspections. And the agency says it is spending time developing guidance designed to function not only under the present administration but under future administrations as well.
What You Need to Know
We now have reports of multiple ATF inspections in which covered Form 4473 suppressor transfers were examined and not treated as violations. And we have the Director of ATF publicly confirming that the agency intends to comply with the injunction and is preparing formal guidance.
There are still unanswered questions. The injunction is limited to protected parties. State law still matters. Other federal statutes remain in effect. And the government’s appellate deadline has not yet passed. But the practical picture is considerably clearer than it was several weeks ago.
The next major development should be ATF’s formal written guidance, or a government filing before the October 5 appeal deadline. Until then, gun owners and dealers should resist the temptation to reduce a complicated federal injunction to a slogan like “the NFA is gone.” With that said, knowing exactly who is protected, what conduct is protected, and what laws remain in place is still what separates exercising the benefit of this ruling from accidentally stepping outside of it.
Become an Armed Attorney Member
Armed Attorneys gives members direct access to experienced self-defense attorneys before, during, and after a self-defense incident. Exclusively for Texans, our goal is simple: help gun owners understand the law, make informed decisions, and avoid facing the legal system alone. Learn more about Armed Attorneys and choose the membership level that fits how you live, carry, and travel. Save $20 at sign-up with promo code: SNW.
The information on this site is presented for general informational and educational purposes only and is not legal advice and does not form a lawyer-client relationship. You should not rely on this information or its applicability to any specific circumstances without speaking with an attorney. Armed Attorneys, LLC is not a law firm and does not directly provide legal representation. Legal services are provided solely by licensed attorneys approved or contracted by Armed Attorneys, LLC.