A federal judge just issued one of the most significant National Firearms Act decisions in decades—and it has nothing to do with Bruen.
In today’s video, I break down the 66-page opinion in Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, where the court held that after Congress reduced the NFA transfer and making taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and AOWs to $0, the constitutional foundation for many of the NFA’s regulatory provisions no longer exists. The court ruled on Article I grounds rather than the Second Amendment, creating a major development that could reshape future NFA litigation.
We’ll cover exactly what the judge ruled, why the Department of Justice lost, what this means for suppressors and SBRs, why the injunction is limited to the plaintiffs, and what happens next as this case heads toward appeal.
Up Next in 2A News
-
GOA Stands With James Harden After Se...
An exhaustive legal case study on the application of vehicle carry provisions under the Texas Penal Code, specifically addressing the public safety enforcement action in Harris County. This analysis reviews the statutory distinction between concealed carry, visible holster mandates, and administr...
-
James Harden NBA Star Arrested For Co...
NBA All Star & Champion James Harden has been arrested in Texas. We break down why and how you can avoid a similar fate...
-
(New Rule 3⧸34) New ATF Rule Change C...
Proposed Rule: https://www.federalregister.gov/publi...
The ATF just proposed a MASSIVE change to NFA ownership rules that could allow married couples to jointly own suppressors, SBRs, and other NFA items WITHOUT needing a trust. In this video, Jared breaks down exactly what the new ATF proposal...
1 Comment