Texas Judge Strikes Down NFA Registration Requirements
A federal judge in Texas ruled Wednesday that key regulatory provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934 are unconstitutional and cannot be enforced, dealing a significant blow to the federal government’s oversight of firearm suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns.
U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas determined that when Congress eliminated the $200 transfer and making taxes on these items through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in 2025, it also eliminated the constitutional basis for the regulatory framework that had been justified under Congress’s taxing power. The ruling came in two consolidated lawsuits — Jensen v. ATF and Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF — challenging the National Firearms Act’s registration and approval requirements.
“No longer can the challenged NFA provisions be justified — as they have been for nearly 90 years — under Congress’s taxing power,” Hendrix wrote in his opinion, as reported by AP News.
The National Firearms Act’s Origins
Congress passed the National Firearms Act in 1934 in response to concerns about mafia violence during the Prohibition era. The law targeted weapons thought to be favored by gangsters, including machine guns, destructive devices such as bombs and grenades, any silencer, rifles with barrels shorter than 16 inches, and shotguns with barrels shorter than 18 inches.
The law was framed as a tax measure, with Attorney General Homer S. Cummings testifying that the federal government had “no inherent police powers to go into certain localities and deal with local crime.” He argued that the power of taxation could be used to restrict guns and accessories that Congress viewed as especially dangerous.
The $200 tax was meant to be prohibitive — equivalent to about $5,000 today. The NFA also imposed an annual occupational tax on importers, manufacturers, and dealers, along with registration requirements that included fingerprints, photographs, personal information, and detailed descriptions of the relevant firearm or accessory.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s Impact
In July 2025, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a massive tax and spending package that reduced the NFA’s $200 transfer and making taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and any other weapon to $0. However, the registration requirements remained in place.
House and Senate Republicans originally tried to eliminate the registration requirement along with the $200 transfer taxes, but the registration repeal was deemed not germane to the budget bill by the Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough. The tax was instead reduced to zero rather than fully repealed.
Judge Hendrix concluded that this change fatally undermined the constitutional rationale for the NFA’s regulatory scheme. “By zeroing out the transfer and making taxes for most NFA firearms, Congress eliminated the constitutional basis for the regulations that formerly supported the taxes for those firearms,” he wrote.
The judge also rejected the government’s argument that the NFA’s registration, reporting, and record-keeping requirements could be justified under the Commerce Clause. “Because Congress enacted the challenged NFA provisions under the Taxing Clause only, the NFA cannot be retroactively justified under another power that Congress never invoked, such as its authority to regulate interstate commerce,” Hendrix wrote, as detailed by Reason Magazine.
Scope of the Ruling
The permanent injunction bars enforcement of the challenged NFA provisions against the plaintiffs, their members, and their customers — both current and future. However, the injunction does not apply universally; it only covers parties before the court, consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, Inc.
The plaintiffs include individuals John Jensen, Jeremy Neusch, and David Lynn Smith, as well as Hot Shots Custom LLC, the Texas State Rifle Association, FPC Action Foundation, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Gun Owners of America and the Firearms Policy Coalition also supported the litigation.
Machine guns and destructive devices remain subject to the $200 tax and its requirements. The “any other weapon” category remains regulated for the Jensen plaintiffs due to lack of standing. The injunction does not take effect for seven days to allow the government to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
While the registration requirement is eliminated for covered items, standard federal background checks under NICS will still be required under federal law.
Reactions from Gun Rights Groups
Gun rights organizations hailed the ruling as a landmark victory. “This is a massive win and an important step forward in our strategic plan to end the NFA,” Firearms Policy Coalition President Brandon Combs said in a statement, as reported by the Firearms Policy Coalition. “We cannot wait to fully and finally eliminate this unconstitutional scheme so people can exercise their rights when, where, and how they choose.”
Second Amendment Foundation Executive Director Adam Kraut said the ruling validates what gun rights advocates have argued since the tax was eliminated. “Without the tax, the remaining requirements for the affected arms under the NFA have no constitutional basis,” Kraut said. “And today the first court to rule on the issue has agreed with us.”
CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb echoed that sentiment, saying, “With the tax no longer in existence, there was no logical reason for the ATF’s registration requirement to continue.”
Gun Control Advocates Express Concern
Gun control groups criticized the decision as a threat to public safety. “Today’s ruling is a dangerous step backward for public safety,” the Giffords Law Center said in a statement, as noted by Breitbart News.
Giffords Law Center Chief Counsel Adam Skaggs noted that the registration process effectively functioned as a heightened background check for NFA weapons. “That process effectively functioned as a heightened background check for NFA weapons, and that process is no longer enforceable,” Skaggs said.
What’s Next
The government has seven days to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Trump administration’s position is unclear — while the Justice Department defended the NFA provisions in court, the administration may choose not to appeal. Republicans in Congress are also working to include language scrapping the registration requirements in a potential reconciliation bill.
As of June 2026, more than 6.4 million firearm suppressors were registered in the United States, according to the ATF. The ruling could have significant implications for other pending NFA challenges, including Brown v. ATF and Roberts v. ATF, and could potentially lead to the full elimination of the NFA’s registration scheme if upheld on appeal.
Judge Hendrix was clear that the remedy must come from the legislative branch. “Efforts to render the NFA constitutional must come from Congress, not this Court,” he wrote.