DOJ Opposes Broader NFA Court Protection After ATF’s Guidance
The Justice Department is asking a federal judge to leave a consequential question unanswered: Does the permanent injunction against challenged National Firearms Act requirements protect every gun owner and covered transaction within the plaintiff states?
In an October 12 filing in the consolidated Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and Jensen v. ATF litigation, DOJ argues that ATF’s nationwide nonenforcement policy makes that clarification unnecessary. The department confirms that ATF is no longer enforcing the challenged requirements against anyone, then argues that the court’s injunction does not independently protect everyone within the states that sued.
Gun owners have won a substantial restoration of their freedom to acquire suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and “any other weapons,” or AOWs. But DOJ’s latest response shows why the fight for lasting protection remains unfinished.
DOJ Says Nationwide Nonenforcement Makes Clarification Unnecessary
As AmmoLand reported October 2, a group of plaintiff states sought clarification of the injunction’s reach and ATF’s obligations to explain it. DOJ requested additional time while the agency prepared public guidance. The department has now answered.
Its response says ATF’s October 9 open letter and accompanying FAQ provide the requested instructions. According to DOJ, ATF “will no longer enforce the challenged NFA provisions against anyone or as to any transactions to which those provisions apply.”
For the covered firearm categories, DOJ says there are no transactions for which ATF will require an FFL to submit a Form 4 and no individuals whom ATF will require to register to complete those purchases from an FFL.
AmmoLand’s October 9 guidance report explained that nationwide policy. It extends specified nonenforcement beyond people protected by the injunction, while applicable Gun Control Act requirements and state restrictions remain.
DOJ now relies on that policy to argue against further clarification:
“Because ATF is not enforcing the challenged NFA provisions in any state, clarifying whether the Court’s injunction entirely prohibits enforcement in a particular group of states would have no real world impact.”
That argument addresses today’s enforcement policy. The scope of a binding court order determines who has judicial protection if that policy changes.
DOJ Opposes Protection for Everyone Within the Plaintiff States
The response goes beyond arguing that clarification is unnecessary. DOJ expressly disputes the states’ broader interpretation.
The final judgment prohibits enforcement against the plaintiffs and, where applicable, their agencies, political subdivisions, members and customers. DOJ argues that this language does not prohibit enforcement against every person or transaction within the 15 plaintiff states.
The department says the states established standing through their own costs of acquiring and possessing NFA firearms, including for law-enforcement purposes. According to DOJ, that supports relief for the states as governmental entities, their agencies and political subdivisions—not everyone who lives or purchases a covered firearm within their borders.
DOJ also argues that the injunction contains no affirmative requirement to issue guidance. Adding one, it says, would modify the judgment rather than clarify it, and the states sought that change outside the applicable 28-day deadline.
These are the government’s arguments. The October 12 document is a response brief, not a new ruling accepting them.
The Missouri Fight Is Part of the Same Unfinished Battle
DOJ also points to the separate Brown v. ATF litigation in Missouri.
The response says several states seeking broader protection there described the Texas injunction as providing relief for their agencies and political subdivisions. DOJ argues that those states cannot claim a narrower injunction in Missouri while advancing a broader interpretation in Texas.
AmmoLand’s October 8 report covered DOJ’s opposition to statewide and nationwide relief in the Missouri litigation. The new Texas filing continues that dispute after ATF’s nationwide guidance removed many immediate federal approval and registration barriers.
The question remains whether gun owners receive broader enforceable court protection.
Gun Rights Must Survive the Next Administration
The existing injunction already provides substantial protection. It expressly binds successors in office and covers specified plaintiffs and, where applicable, current and future members and customers. A future official cannot simply disregard that order.
But nationwide agency discretion does not expand the injunction. ATF’s policy and enforceable judicial relief provide different protection.
State restrictions present another obstacle for gun owners. Neither the guidance nor this response eliminates those statutes.
Gun owners should press this victory forward. The Texas court rejected the challenged requirements under Congress’s enumerated powers; it did not decide the Second Amendment claims. Those constitutional challenges remain part of the broader campaign to dismantle the NFA.
Suppressors and short-barreled firearms should never have required a federal registry or advance government permission. Ending enforcement is a major victory, but Americans deserve the restrictions removed altogether. Congress should repeal the NFA, or at minimum remove these arms from it entirely, while continued litigation secures lasting protection. “Shall not be infringed” does not depend on who occupies the ATF director’s office.
About Duncan Johnson:
Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy. Duncan is a regular contributor and editor-in-chief for AmmoLand News and is responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.