DOJ Targets D.C. Suppressor Ban
-
A lot of suppressor-related legal activity stacked up in May, and the federal government wading in directly is worth paying attention to.
"What was fringe constitutional litigation a few years ago is now a mainstream Second Amendment fight. Now the federal government is saying something similar — in court, on the record. That's a different kind of weight."
There's a real difference between a gun-rights org filing a challenge and DOJ putting the same argument in a federal court filing. Whatever you think of the current administration, this changes the legal terrain in ways that don't easily unwind.
"Brown v. ATF is the one to watch closely. Congress killed the $200 tax, but the NFA's registration and regulatory apparatus is still intact. The case argues that what remains can't survive Bruen's historical tradition test."
This is the actual fight. The tax being gone is nice, but if the registry and the wait times and the paperwork survive, cans are still effectively gated for most buyers. How the Eastern District reads Bruen here could ripple way beyond Missouri.
For those of you who've been through the NFA process — Form 4, wait, wait some more — how has the suppressor landscape in Idaho changed your range setup, and are you watching Brown v. ATF as a reason to hold off on another purchase?
Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login