Skip to main content
NFA Faces Constitutional Reckoning
LEGAL
2 min read

NFA Faces Constitutional Reckoning

FPC and co-plaintiffs including the NRA and SAF filed for summary judgment in Brown v. ATF, arguing Congress's 2025 repeal of NFA transfer taxes eliminated the only constitutional basis the law has ever had. The motion also challenges suppressor and SBR restrictions directly under the Second Amendment. A district court ruling is the next step, with appeals certain to follow.

Steve DuskettMarch 14, 2026
Last edited
Legal Details

NFA Faces Constitutional Reckoning

In Force
NFA Faces Constitutional Reckoning
Identification
Jurisdiction
Territory
United States (Federal)

NFA Faces Constitutional Reckoning

FPC argues Congress's own 2025 tax repeal pulled the legal foundation out from under the NFA's registration requirements

From The Boise Gun Club Handbook

A federal coalition of gun rights groups filed for summary judgment Friday, asking a Missouri court to declare the National Firearms Act unconstitutional and halt its enforcement.

Driving the news: , joined by the NRA, , and others, filed a motion for summary judgment in Brown v. ATF in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The motion argues that Congress's 2025 elimination of the NFA's making and transfer taxes on most NFA-regulated items destroyed the only constitutional basis the law ever had.

Catch up quick:

  • The NFA was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1937 exclusively as a taxing measure—not under the Commerce Clause or any other authority
  • Congress zeroed out most NFA taxes in 2025, stripping that foundation
  • What remains—the registration and recordkeeping requirements—now stands without a constitutional leg to stand on, plaintiffs argue

The legal question: The brief runs two tracks. First, with no tax to collect, the taxing power justification evaporates. Second, even if the court looks to the Commerce Clause, the NFA still fails—it doesn't regulate interstate commerce channels or instrumentalities, and NFA-regulated items don't clear the "substantial effects" bar the Supreme Court has required.

"The NFA's tax on most firearms is dead, and so is the excuse that kept this unconstitutional and immoral scheme alive." — FPC President Brandon Combs

Beyond the taxing power argument, the brief also takes direct aim at the NFA's suppressor and short-barreled rifle restrictions as independent violations—arguing those restrictions were always unconstitutional, regardless of how the tax question resolves.

What Idaho owners should know: If the court grants summary judgment and the injunction holds, the federal registration requirements for suppressors and SBRs—and potentially other —could be unenforceable. That's not a done deal; this is a district court, and any ruling will almost certainly be appealed. But a favorable ruling here creates real legal pressure upstream.

What to watch: Whether the Eastern District of Missouri grants the motion outright, requests additional briefing, or schedules oral argument. The Trump administration's DOJ posture on defending the NFA will also matter—FPC separately notes the DOJ has already been filing briefs on this terrain. The case brief is publicly available at firearmspolicy.org/brown.

#
#
Join the discussion on Campfire

This is not legal advice

This guide provides general information about federal and state firearms laws based on publicly available statutes. Laws change frequently and vary significantly by state. Always verify current laws in your jurisdiction. Consult a qualified attorney for legal advice on your specific situation. When in doubt, contact local law enforcement or state police.

Was this article helpful?

Loading comments...