DOJ Says It Told Congress It Will Not Appeal Texas Ruling That Struck Down NFA Registration for Suppressors, SBRs and Short-Barreled Shotguns

The ruling came down Aug. 5, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. According to the Second Amendment Foundation, the court held that the remaining registration scheme for short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, any other weapons (AOWs) and suppressors is unconstitutional. Gun Owners of America describes it the same way, as a ruling that the NFA’s registration requirements are unconstitutional for firearms whose tax has been reduced to zero, and NRA-ILA characterizes it as striking registration for suppressors, SBRs and SBSs.

The theory behind the challenge is simple. SAF lays it out this way: starting in 1934, the NFA imposed a $200 tax and registration regime on these arms, resting on Congress’s power to levy taxes. When President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year and zeroed out that tax, SAF and its partners filed three lawsuits arguing that without a tax to collect, the taxing power no longer carries the registration requirement with it.

Several groups claim the win, and each describes its own piece of it. SAF says the ruling came in Jensen v. ATF, a case it funded, with its sister organization the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as a plaintiff alongside FPC Action Foundation, Texas Rifle Association, Hot Shots Custom and three individuals. GOA says the Aug. 5 ruling was the product of its own lawsuit and lists Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, Silencer Shop Foundation and B&T USA among the plaintiffs. FPC calls it its win too.

After the ruling, the court gave the government one week to ask for a stay pending appeal, which is a pause that keeps a ruling from taking effect while a higher court reviews it. According to SAF, the government let that deadline pass on the night of Aug. 12, and the injunction took effect. “It’s important to remember that the government still has time to appeal the ruling, so it’s not quite time to break out the champagne,” SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said at the time. Now the DOJ has answered that question.

That settles the appeal. It settles very little else.

The injunction is not a nationwide repeal. By GOA’s own reading, it protects the plaintiffs and, where applicable, their current and future members and customers. SAF says the same about CCRKBA members. If you are not a member of one of the plaintiff organizations or a customer of one of the plaintiff businesses, nothing in these accounts says the order reaches you. As of GOA’s Aug. 24 FAQ, DOJ and ATF had issued no guidance on what paperwork, if any, a suppressor or SBR transfer requires now, and by the DOJ’s own account in this latest motion, that guidance is still being finalized. GOA’s advice to its own members was blunt: do not assume a particular transaction is lawful without consulting an attorney. State law still sits on top of all of this, the same way it does with carry permits, and my concealed carry permit information by state is where I would start on your own state’s rules before assuming anything is settled.

More from USA Carry:

The right mindset here is patience, not celebration. The federal government declining to appeal is a big step. But the practical questions that matter at a dealer’s counter, what forms, which buyers, which guns, are still sitting with ATF. The plaintiff states have asked the court for answers. So have a lot of gun owners.

I will continue tracking the NFA litigation and the ATF guidance as it develops.