The Department of Justice has allowed a Texas federal court ruling to take effect, loosening federal regulations on silencers, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns for certain Americans. The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix on August 5, enjoins enforcement of key provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA) for specific plaintiffs, including 15 states and several firearm businesses and advocacy groups, after Congress eliminated the NFA’s transfer and making taxes for those weapons last year.

The Trump administration declined to pause the ruling by the judge’s one-week deadline, meaning that covered parties may now possess and transfer these firearms without federal registration or approval. According to The Texan, Judge Hendrix found that once Congress set the tax rate to zero, it removed the federal government’s regulatory authority under the NFA, since the law was originally grounded in Congress’s power to tax, not to regulate commerce.

The court’s injunction specifically protects the named plaintiffs and their members or customers—including manufacturers, retailers, and gun owners in states like Texas, Georgia, and Utah—but does not extend nationwide. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action explains that while these parties can skip federal registration, other laws still apply: state requirements for registration, and certain federal rules on transferring and transporting short-barreled firearms, remain in effect. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has not yet updated its guidance, so some legal uncertainty persists for those not covered by the lawsuit. As noted by the NRA-ILA, the court’s order could be changed or stayed in the future.

Legal analysts at the Cato Institute describe this as a major shift in federal firearms regulation, emphasizing that the court ruled on Congress’s legal authority, not on Second Amendment grounds. This reflects a pattern of courts more closely scrutinizing federal gun laws, as seen in recent Supreme Court decisions. Cato’s analysis suggests this could lead to further challenges to federal gun restrictions.

Going forward, the DOJ’s decision not to appeal means the injunction stands for now, but further litigation is possible in related cases. Gun owners are encouraged to consult legal experts about their specific situation, as rapid changes in the law could affect compliance obligations at both the federal and state level.

West Michigan's Morning News