A brand new lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act (NFA) has drawn support from several pro-gun rights organizations.
On February 26, the Buckeye Firearms Association (BFA), American Suppressor Association Foundation (NSAF), Center for Human Liberty (CHL), Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO), Meridian Ordnance and two individuals filed the lawsuit Roberts v. ATF with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
The lawsuit challenges the NFA on the basis that, since President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill removed the $200 tax on suppressors and other NFA items, the tax law is now nothing more than an unconstitutional regulatory scheme.
“Plaintiffs are individuals and entities that are subject to (or have members who are subject to) the NFA’s regulatory requirements pertaining to untaxed firearms,” the complaint states. “Plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring that the NFA is unconstitutional with respect to the untaxed firearms it purports to regulate and enjoining enforcement of the unconstitutional provisions and any related regulations. Additionally, Plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring that the NFA is unconstitutional with respect to suppressors and short-barreled rifles under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and enjoining enforcement of the unconstitutional provisions and any related regulations.”
Announcement of the new lawsuit—the third now challenging the NFA—was met with quick support from gun-rights groups, including the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), which argues that the NFA imposes felony prosecution for violations of its regulatory scheme over now-untaxed firearms.
“This new case is another critical shot at taking down the National Firearms Act—an immoral, unconstitutional ban scheme that has no place in a free country,” Brandon Combs, FPC President, said in a news release addressing the lawsuit. “FPC is proud to stand with our allies as we drive a nationwide strategy to dismantle this federal regime, and we’ll keep fighting until all peaceable people can exercise their rights when, where, and how they choose.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), which is a named plaintiff in another lawsuit challenging the NFA, Brown v. ATF, is also throwing its support behind the newest challenge.
“The government’s historically claimed constitutional authority for the NFA was its ability to levy taxes,” SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said in a news release. “Once President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill and taxes on silencers and short-barreled rifles were zeroed out, that authority no longer applied. Without it, the remaining registration requirements must be struck down as well. That’s exactly why we are now supporting a third challenge to this law in federal court.”
The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) is also supporting the lawsuit, and said in a legal alert that the complaint also argues that the NFA’s registration regime for suppressors and short-barreled rifles violates the Second Amendment.
“The Supreme Court has established that any regulation on arms-bearing conduct must be consistent with our nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” the alert stated. “And, the complaint argues, there is no tradition that supports the NFA’s registration regime for protected arms such as suppressors and short-barreled rifles.”