doj – Texas Gun Rights

GIFFORDS Melts Down as Texas NFA Injunction Takes Effect

TXGR Staff — Thu, 13 Aug 2026 21:52:32 +0000

The gun-confiscation lobby is furious that the Department of Justice did not obtain another stay before a major federal court injunction involving the National Firearms Act took effect in Texas.

On Thursday, GIFFORDS joined Everytown for Gun Safety and Brady in attacking DOJ over the ruling involving suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and other NFA-regulated firearms.

GIFFORDS Executive Director Emma Brown accused DOJ of putting “the gun industry’s profits” ahead of public safety and demanded that the administration appeal.

Brady President Kris Brown went further, warning that supposedly “uniquely lethal weapons and devices” had suddenly been deregulated.

But that rhetoric leaves out some important facts about what the Texas court actually did.

What the Court Actually Ruled

On August 5, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix held that key NFA provisions could no longer be sustained under Congress’s taxing power after Congress eliminated the federal making and transfer taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and Any Other Weapons.

The injunction is not a nationwide repeal of the NFA.

It protects the plaintiffs and, where applicable, their members, customers, agencies, and political subdivisions — not automatically every gun owner in America.

Texas Gun Rights has already published a detailed breakdown of who may be protected, what the ruling means for buyers and FFLs, and the important limits of the injunction.

But the bottom line in Hendrix’s ruling was straightforward:

Once Congress eliminated the taxes at issue, the federal government could no longer rely on its taxing power to sustain the challenged regulatory provisions attached to them.

The court did not need to reach the plaintiffs’ separate Second Amendment claims.

That is a much narrower reality than the gun-confiscation lobby’s rhetoric would have Americans believe.

The “Uniquely Lethal” Rhetoric Doesn’t Match the Hardware

The gun-confiscation lobby is now talking about the ruling as though machine guns were suddenly being handed out over the counter.

That is not what happened.

Suppressors reduce the sound generated by a firearm. Research published through NIOSH found that suppressors can substantially reduce firearm noise exposure, although suppressed gunfire can still present a hearing risk.

They do not make gunshots silent.

And they do not turn a firearm into a machine gun.

Short-barreled rifles and shotguns are not machine guns either.

ATF distinguishes short-barreled rifles and shotguns largely by barrel and overall length, while federal law defines a machine gun by its ability to fire more than one shot automatically, without manual reloading, through a single function of the trigger.

A semiautomatic rifle does not become a machine gun because its barrel falls below a government-selected length.

And a suppressor does not fire a projectile at all.

Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt said the gun-confiscation lobby is treating fundamentally different firearms and devices as though putting them under the same federal statute made them mechanically equivalent.

“‘Silencers’ are hearing protection devices. Short-barreled firearms and shotguns do not make firearms any more dangerous or deadly than long guns. Yet they were all regulated under the NFA like machine guns,” said McNutt.

The NFA may have placed these items under the same federal regulatory umbrella.

That does not make them the same thing.

GIFFORDS Wants an Appeal. Texas Gun Rights Wants the NFA Gone.

GIFFORDS, Brady, and Everytown want DOJ to appeal and keep the federal restrictions alive.

Texas Gun Rights believes DOJ should do the opposite.

Let the injunction stand.

And then Congress should finish the job.

The current ruling remains limited in scope. Gun owners can still face a maze of federal restrictions depending on the firearm, the transaction, the purchaser, and whether the injunction actually protects them.

That is precisely the problem.

Americans should not have to determine whether their name, membership, dealer, or transaction falls within the wording of a federal court order before exercising a constitutional right.

The permanent answer is not another round of litigation designed to rescue the NFA.

It is repeal.

Let the ruling stand.

Let the NFA fall.

If you want to help Texas Gun Rights fight back against the gun-confiscation lobby and keep the pressure on Washington to dismantle the NFA, chip in today.

DOJ Is Finally Suing Gun-Ban States — Now It Must Deliver Lasting Victories

TXGR Staff — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 15:29:15 +0000

The Justice Department has launched a coordinated legal offensive against state and local gun restrictions. Texas Gun Rights says the campaign must produce binding precedent that survives the next administration.

The United States Department of Justice is finally going on offense against gun-ban states and cities.

Through its dedicated Second Amendment Section, led by former TXGR board Chairman Barry Arrington, the DOJ has filed lawsuits challenging restrictions on commonly owned rifles, standard-capacity magazines, handguns, carry permits, and other protected conduct.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon says the department has pursued more than a dozen challenges as part of a deliberate strategy to create broader legal precedent instead of attacking every infringement individually.

That shift is long overdue.

But lawsuits and press releases are not victories by themselves.

Gun owners should judge this campaign by whether DOJ secures injunctions, final judgments, and appellate decisions that permanently limit the gun confiscation lobby’s power.

DOJ Goes on Offense

The Civil Rights Division’s Second Amendment Section is authorized to investigate patterns of infringement, file original lawsuits, intervene in existing cases, submit briefs, and seek other opportunities to expand legal protection for the right to keep and bear arms.

That authority is already being used.

DOJ sued Los Angeles County over extreme delays in processing carry permits after reviewing more than 8,000 applications. According to the department, only two applications had been approved, while some interviews were scheduled as far as two years into the future.

The department later sued Denver over its ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles and Colorado over its prohibition on standard-capacity magazines.

On July 1, DOJ filed separate lawsuits against California and Virginia. The California case targets the state’s Glock restrictions and handgun roster, while the Virginia case challenges a law criminalizing the commercial purchase and sale of AR-15-style rifles.

The Second Amendment Section has also opened investigations and filed additional challenges involving jurisdictions such as Philadelphia, the District of Columbia, and Montgomery County, Maryland.

The Strategy Is Bigger Than One Lawsuit

DOJ’s stated strategy is to select cases capable of producing decisions with broader reach.

Conflicting appellate rulings over rifle bans, magazine restrictions, and other major Second Amendment questions can create opportunities for the Supreme Court to intervene and establish nationwide standards.

That is more valuable than winning a temporary concession from one hostile city.

A binding appellate decision can restrict gun-ban politicians across an entire federal circuit. A Supreme Court ruling can destroy the legal foundation for similar restrictions nationwide.

But the opposite is also true.

A poorly selected case or weakly argued appeal can leave destructive precedent in place for years.

This campaign must therefore be measured by the law it changes — not simply the number of complaints DOJ files.

“For decades, the Justice Department stood by while gun-ban politicians forced law-abiding Americans to spend their own money defending rights the government was supposed to protect,” said Chris McNutt, president of Texas Gun Rights.

“Suing these jurisdictions is long overdue — but we do not need political theater. We need court orders that crush these gun bans and leave the gun confiscation lobby nowhere to hide.”

These Victories Must Survive Washington

This litigation campaign is fundamentally different from temporary regulatory rollbacks.

An administration can reverse enforcement policy, withdraw guidance, or rewrite agency rules. Binding judicial precedent is harder for the next anti-gun administration to erase.

That is why DOJ must pursue cases through final judgment and appeal when necessary.

The department must also resist settlements that allow gun-ban jurisdictions to make cosmetic changes while preserving the substance of an infringement.

The goal should not be to negotiate slightly less abusive gun restrictions.

The goal should be to defeat them.

Texas Gun Rights welcomes a Justice Department willing to treat the Second Amendment as a civil right and use federal power against state and local officials who violate it.

But gun owners should demand lasting results.

Every unconstitutional rifle ban overturned, every standard-capacity magazine prohibition struck down, and every abusive permitting system dismantled makes it harder for the gun confiscation lobby to rebuild its agenda.

Chip in today to help Texas Gun Rights hold gun-ban politicians accountable and fight for permanent victories against unconstitutional gun laws.

Boebert Bill Would Repeal Federal Handgun Mailing Ban

TXGR Staff — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 15:28:59 +0000

The Freedom to Ship Act would remove a nearly century-old gun-control law and challenge discriminatory restrictions imposed by private shipping carriers.

The Justice Department has already concluded that the federal ban on mailing handguns violates the Second Amendment.

Now Congress has a chance to remove that restriction from federal law.

Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado introduced H.R. 9979, the Freedom to Ship Act, to repeal the handgun-mailing prohibition and protect lawful firearm shipments through common carriers.

Texas Congressman Michael Cloud is among the bill’s cosponsors.

DOJ Found the Mailing Ban Unconstitutional

Congress enacted the federal handgun-mailing ban in 1927.

Now codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1715, the law generally prohibits ordinary citizens from mailing pistols, revolvers, and other concealable firearms outside limited exceptions.

In January, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the restriction is unconstitutional as applied to firearms protected by the Second Amendment, including handguns.

The opinion found that the law burdens Americans seeking to transport, receive, repair, or maintain firearms for lawful purposes. It also found no historical tradition supporting a general prohibition on shipping constitutionally protected arms.

DOJ therefore determined that federal prosecutors should not enforce § 1715 against protected firearms and that the Postal Service should revise its regulations.

The Postal Service responded in April by proposing rules that would allow lawful handguns to be mailed under many of the same conditions applied to rifles and shotguns. Those rules would still require compliance with the Gun Control Act and applicable state and local laws.

But administrative policy is not repeal.

Section 1715 remains in federal law, leaving open the possibility that a future administration could attempt to revive enforcement.

Freedom to Ship Act Goes Further

The Freedom to Ship Act would permanently repeal the federal handgun-mailing prohibition.

It would also confront private-carrier policies that leave many ordinary gun owners without a practical way to ship lawful firearms.

Major carriers frequently restrict firearm shipments to federally licensed businesses operating under specially approved agreements. These policies can make lawful repairs, transfers, and transportation more difficult and expensive.

Boebert’s office says the bill would prevent common carriers from forcing federal firearms licensees into restrictive contracts and imposing excessive fees for firearm shipments. The legislation has been endorsed by the National Association for Gun Rights and other national gun-rights organizations.

The bill would not erase existing laws governing who may possess, purchase, or receive a firearm.

It would remove special transportation barriers imposed on otherwise lawful conduct.

Texas Lawmakers Should Join Michael Cloud

Congressman Michael Cloud deserves credit for supporting the Freedom to Ship Act.

The rest of the Texas congressional delegation should join him.

Law-abiding gun owners should not be forced to depend on temporary DOJ policy while an unconstitutional statute remains on the books. Nor should private carriers be allowed to impose arbitrary barriers on lawful firearm commerce.

Texas Gun Rights calls on every member of the Texas delegation to cosponsor H.R. 9979 and demand congressional action on the Freedom to Ship Act.

The Second Amendment must not be treated as a second-class right.

Chip in today to help Texas Gun Rights fight every government mandate and corporate policy that infringes on your right to keep and bear arms.

DOJ Folds — But the Post Office Carry Ban Still Needs to Die

TXGR Staff — Tue, 28 Jul 2026 18:29:47 +0000

The federal government is backing down from its fight to defend the ban on carrying firearms at ordinary post offices.

The Department of Justice has moved to voluntarily dismiss its appeal in the case challenging the decades-old federal restriction on carrying firearms inside post offices and on surrounding postal property. If granted by the Fifth Circuit, the district court’s permanent injunction will remain in place.

That is a major win.

But the post office carry ban is not fully dead for every gun owner in America.

The Ban Is Crumbling

Texas Gun Rights previously warned that the post office gun ban had taken a major hit — but Texans still were not fully free.

That remains true.

According to Firearms Policy Coalition, the lower court victory protects present and future members of FPC and the Second Amendment Foundation. But constitutional rights should not depend on whether a gun owner joined the right organization at the right time.

The Second Amendment does not stop at the post office door.

Law-abiding gun owners should not be forced to disarm just to pick up mail, drop off a package, or step onto ordinary postal property.

DOJ’s New Direction

DOJ’s decision is also hard to ignore given the growing pro-Second Amendment presence inside the department.

Earlier this year, longtime Texas Gun Rights and Texas Gun Rights Foundation Chairman Barry Arrington stepped down after accepting a position with the DOJ Civil Rights Division’s Second Amendment Section.

Public filings do not say who inside DOJ drove this decision.

But with Arrington now helping lead the Second Amendment Section, this move appears to be part of a much-needed shift away from defending every unconstitutional gun-control scheme left behind by the federal bureaucracy.

Gun-Free Zones Are Under Fire

For decades, federal bureaucrats treated post offices like Second Amendment dead zones.

That argument was always absurd.

Post offices are not prisons. They are not courthouses. They are not secure federal facilities with armed checkpoints.

They are ordinary public buildings used by ordinary Americans every day.

And the right to self-defense does not disappear because the government owns the counter.

Finish the Job

Texas Gun Rights Foundation was prepared to make sure Texas gun owners were heard if DOJ pushed this fight through the Fifth Circuit.

Now DOJ appears to be backing down before that battle even begins.

That is good news.

But the post office carry ban should not merely be weakened, narrowed, or limited to members of certain organizations.

It should be wiped off the books completely.

No gun owner should have to choose between exercising the Second Amendment and using the mail.

Chip in today to help Texas Gun Rights keep fighting to destroy gun-free zones and defend your Second Amendment rights without compromise.

Brady Sues To Force ATF To Hand Over Gun Dealer Target List

TXGR Staff — Mon, 13 Jul 2026 20:17:10 +0000

The gun confiscation lobby wants a list.

Not a list of violent criminals.

A list of lawful gun dealers.

Brady has filed a federal lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Department of Justice demanding records tied to ATF’s “Demand Letter 2” program — records that could identify firearm dealers and pawnbrokers based on trace data that does not prove they did anything wrong.

Brady claims this is about “transparency.” But gun owners have seen this game before.

First, the gun-ban lobby demands the names.

Then come the media attacks, political pressure campaigns, bank blacklists, insurance problems, local harassment, regulatory fishing expeditions, and calls for the government to crack down on lawful firearm businesses.

This is not about stopping violent criminals.

It is about using ATF records to build a target list.

Brady Wants ATF to Name the Dealers

According to Brady’s complaint, the group filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking all Demand Letter 2 notices issued by ATF to federal firearms licensees in fiscal years 2017, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2025.

ATF sends these letters to certain licensed dealers and pawnbrokers after a threshold number of firearms sold by that business are later recovered by law enforcement in connection with crimes within three years of sale.

Brady wants those letters released.

And Brady’s own filing makes clear the goal is not merely to study a government program in the abstract. The group says disclosure of the volume of dealers receiving these letters — and the identities of those businesses over time — would help evaluate ATF’s policies.

In plain English, Brady wants names.

The ATF withheld the records in full, citing FOIA exemptions related to commercial information and privacy interests. Brady appealed, DOJ failed to issue a timely substantive response, and now Brady is asking a federal court to force production.

That is the legal posture.

But the political objective is much easier to understand.

The gun confiscation lobby wants ATF to hand over information it can use against firearm retailers.

A Trace Is Not Proof of Wrongdoing

A gun can be legally sold by a licensed dealer, later resold, stolen, trafficked, transferred, or misused by a criminal long after the original sale.

That does not mean the dealer committed a crime, acted negligently, or knowingly armed a criminal.

But the gun confiscation lobby has spent years trying to blur those lines because trace data gives them a weapon they can use against the firearms industry.

They do not need to prove a dealer did anything wrong if they can splash the name across a report, hand it to friendly media outlets, and pressure politicians to “do something.”

“Brady is not suing to stop violent criminals. They are trying to force ATF to help them build a target list of lawful firearm dealers,” said Chris McNutt, President of Texas Gun Rights Foundation.

“A firearm trace is not proof of wrongdoing, and the gun confiscation lobby knows it. But if they can turn sensitive ATF records into a public blacklist, they can use the media, banks, insurers, regulators, and local officials to squeeze the firearms industry without ever passing a gun ban.”

That is why this lawsuit should concern every gun owner who understands how the anti-gun machine operates.

They rarely stop with the person who actually commits the crime. They blame the gun, the dealer, and the manufacturer.

Then they use that blame to demand more federal power.

ATF Should Not Become Brady’s Opposition-Research Department

The ATF already has more than enough power to harass, inspect, threaten, and shut down gun dealers.

Under Joe Biden, the agency’s “zero tolerance” policy turned paperwork errors into a weapon against FFLs, driving lawful dealers out of business while violent criminals continued to walk free.

Now Brady wants to use litigation to force more information out of the same federal agency and put it to work for the gun-ban lobby’s political campaign against firearm retailers.

That should alarm gun owners.

ATF is supposed to be a federal law enforcement agency, not an opposition-research department for Brady, Everytown, Giffords, or any other anti-gun group trying to destroy the Second Amendment.

Congress has long recognized that firearm trace information is sensitive. Releasing it can mislead the public, compromise investigations, and turn raw law enforcement data into ammunition for political attacks.

This Is the Backdoor War on the Second Amendment

The gun confiscation lobby understands it cannot always ban guns outright, especially in states like Texas where gun owners remain politically powerful.

So it attacks the infrastructure that makes the Second Amendment practical in real life.

Gun dealers. Manufacturers. Shooting ranges. Training companies. Banks that serve the firearms industry. Insurance companies willing to cover lawful businesses. Payment processors that refuse to discriminate against gun owners.

The strategy is simple: if they cannot repeal the Second Amendment, they will try to make it impossible to exercise.

The same crowd that claims to support “reasonable gun safety” is trying to pressure ATF into handing over records that could be used to smear lawful businesses based on trace data that does not prove wrongdoing.

This is lawfare.

And it is aimed directly at the firearms industry gun owners depend on.

Texas Gun Rights Foundation Is Watching

This fight is not just about paperwork.

It is another front in the gun confiscation lobby’s war against the right to keep and bear arms.

The same gun-ban lobby that wants to outlaw commonly owned rifles, impose gun owner registration schemes, and pass red flag-style gun confiscation laws also wants to choke off the lawful businesses that serve gun owners every day.

Texas Gun Rights Foundation will continue monitoring this lawsuit, exposing the gun confiscation lobby’s legal strategy, and defending the Second Amendment — without compromise.

Chip in today to help Texas Gun Rights Foundation fight back against the gun confiscation lobby’s lawfare campaign against gun owners and the firearms industry.

DOJ Hides Gun-Rights Restoration Rules While Ordinary Americans Wait

TXGR Staff — Wed, 08 Jul 2026 14:57:31 +0000

The Department of Justice says it wants to restore Second Amendment rights.

But now the DOJ is hiding records that could show ordinary Americans how that process actually works.

According to Ammoland, the DOJ is refusing to release records tied to how certain individuals were selected for federal firearm-rights restoration, citing privacy concerns under federal open-records law.

That should alarm every gun owner who believes rights restoration should be based on clear standards — not insider access, celebrity status, or bureaucratic guesswork.

The issue is not whether peaceable Americans should get their rights back.

They should.

The issue is whether the federal government gets to hand-pick winners while everyone else is told to wait in line and trust the bureaucracy.

DOJ RESTORES RIGHTS FOR SOME, HIDES THE RULES FROM EVERYONE ELSE

The DOJ has already granted federal firearm-rights restoration to a small group of individuals, including actor Mel Gibson.

At the same time, the DOJ says it is still developing a broader web-based application process for everyone else seeking to restore their federal firearm rights.

In plain English, a few people have already received relief.

Everyone else is still waiting for the rules.

And when records were requested to find out what criteria DOJ used, DOJ reportedly withheld them.

What evidence did the government rely on?

What factors mattered?

What made those individuals eligible?

How can a regular citizen with no celebrity name, no insider connections, and no political pull know whether he qualifies?

Rights restoration cannot become another federal insider game.

TEXAS GUN RIGHTS IS FIGHTING FOR CLEAR STANDARDS

This fight is not limited to Washington, D.C.

Texas Gun Rights is already fighting in the Texas Legislature to restore gun rights for nonviolent felons who have completed their sentences and paid their debt to society.

In 2025, Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt testified in support of HB 2759 by Rep. Wes Virdell, legislation backed by Texas Gun Rights and Gun Owners of America to restore firearm rights for nonviolent felons in Texas.

The bill would have amended Texas Penal Code Section 46.04 to stop treating all felonies the same for firearm-possession purposes.

It kept restrictions in place for violent felons and serious public-safety offenses, while allowing nonviolent felons to regain their firearm rights after release from confinement or supervision.

Peaceable Texans who committed nonviolent offenses, served their time, rebuilt their lives, and returned to society should not face a lifetime gun ban.

Unfortunately, HB 2759 did not receive a vote out of committee.

That needs to change in 2027.

“Rights restoration should not depend on who you know, how famous you are, or whether a bureaucrat behind closed doors likes your application,” said Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt.

“The government should have to follow clear rules. That is why Texas Gun Rights is fighting to restore gun rights for nonviolent felons in Texas — because peaceable citizens who have paid their debt deserve more than excuses and endless waiting.”

Texas Gun Rights plans to continue this fight during the upcoming 90th Legislative Session.

Chip in today to help Texas Gun Rights keep fighting to defend and restore the Second Amendment — without compromise.

Fifth Circuit Rejects DOJ Delay in ATF “Engaged in the Business” Lawsuit

TXGR Staff — Thu, 22 Jan 2026 19:31:57 +0000

The fight for the Second Amendment just scored a clear procedural victory as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) attempt to delay the legal challenge to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) controversial “engaged in the business” rule.

The decision keeps the legal challenge moving forward and sends a message that the executive branch cannot simply stall justice to bend the rules against law-abiding gun owners.

What Is the “Engaged in the Business” Rule?

The ATF’s “engaged in the business” regulation is a bureaucratic landmine that dramatically expands who the federal government can treat as a gun dealer.

Under the rule, even ordinary Americans — hobbyists, collectors, or people selling a few firearms they no longer want — could be forced to operate as federally regulated gun dealers if the ATF decides they’re “engaged in the business” of selling guns.

That means:

expensive federal licenses,
intrusive recordkeeping,
background checks on private sellers (a de facto and complete registry of gun owners),
and the threat of federal enforcement for the tiniest paperwork mistake.

It is one of the most dangerous administrative reinterpretations of federal law we’ve seen, and gun owners have been fighting it in court.

Fifth Circuit Won’t Let DOJ Push Off Justice

The DOJ asked the Fifth Circuit to delay — yet again — the case challenging this overreach.

The agency wanted more time before the court would consider the merits of the lawsuit, effectively letting the regulation stand unchallenged for months or even years.

The Fifth Circuit said “no.”

By refusing to grant the delay, the appeals court ensured the case will proceed without being buried by bureaucratic stall tactics. That’s a critical procedural victory that keeps pressure on ATF and preserves the opportunity for a substantive ruling.

Texas Gun Rights and NAGR Are Backing GOA’s Fight

While Gun Owners of America and Attorney General Ken Paxton have spearheaded the fight, Texas Gun Rights and its national affiliate, the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), filed an amicus brief in this case to make one thing clear:

When the federal government tries to redefine gun laws in ways that sweep in ordinary citizens, gun owners across the country — not just in Texas — will be harmed.

NAGR and Texas Gun Rights argued that the ATF’s rule exceeded the agency’s legal authority, infringed on Second Amendment freedoms, and would chill the rights of countless lawful Americans.

NAGR President Dudley Brown has been on the front lines of this fight for years, including traveling abroad to warn international bodies like the United Nations about the dangers of bureaucratic gun control through backdoor regulations.

Chris McNutt: “We Don’t Let Bureaucrats Rewrite the Law”

Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt issued a blistering statement on the Fifth Circuit’s refusal to delay:

“Today’s decision is a shot across the bow of the ATF and DOJ. We will not stand by while federal bureaucrats try to reclassify honest gun owners as criminals through regulatory trickery. The Second Amendment isn’t a suggestion they can reinterpret when it suits them. If the ATF wants to change the law, they need Congress to do it — not their own rulewriters. We applaud the Fifth Circuit for rejecting the delay, and we will continue this fight until the rights of law-abiding Americans are protected.”

The Fifth Circuit’s move does not decide the case on the merits, but it does stop the government from using delay as a defense.

Gun owners should understand what this ruling means:

The court recognizes that bureaucratic delays are not justice.

The case will move forward toward full judicial review.

Citizens and organizations like Texas Gun Rights and NAGR are not going away.

When the rights of ordinary Americans are at stake, the fight can’t be parked in legal purgatory.

And as long as agencies like ATF try to stretch their power beyond what Congress authorized, gun owners will be there pushing back — in court, in the legislature, and at the ballot box.

Because no one wins freedom through delay. Help us fuel the fight by chipping in below.

Pam Bondi’s DOJ Defends NFA in Continued War On Gun Owners

Chris M — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 22:52:34 +0000

Pam Bondi’s Department of Injustice (DOJ) just detonated a political and constitutional bombshell.

In a stunning 48-page summary-judgment brief filed in SilencerShop Foundation v. ATF, DOJ is openly asking a federal judge to resurrect the National Firearms Act, preserve the federal gun registry, and declare that suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, and AOWs are not protected by the Second Amendment.

And they want it done with no trial, no discovery, and no further evidence.

Bondi’s DOJ claims:

A $0 tax is still a “valid tax”
The NFA’s registry survives even though Congress eliminated the tax
The Commerce Clause gives DOJ sweeping power to regulate firearms
The Necessary & Proper Clause authorizes federal gun registration
SBRs, SBSs, silencers, and AOWs are “dangerous and unusual” and thus NOT protected by the Second Amendment
The court should immediately grant judgment for DOJ

And it gets worse.

In the same brief, DOJ leaned on FDR-era “Necessary and Proper” and “Commerce Clause” theories to claim the federal government can regulate — and even ban — firearms it deems “particularly dangerous” or “easily concealable.”

In other words, Bondi’s DOJ isn’t just trying to resurrect the NFA — it is laying the legal foundation to prohibit entire categories of common firearms.

And it’s only possible because of one man: John Cornyn.

Cornyn’s Surrender Created This Mess

Let’s call it what it is: John Cornyn folded like a cheap lawn chair during OBBB negotiations.

When the Democrat Senate parliamentarian claimed a full NFA repeal violated the Byrd Rule and tore out the deregulation language — leaving the registry infrastructure in place — Cornyn declared “victory.”

And the establishment gun lobby helped him sell the surrender.

TXGR, NAGR, and GOA warned that gun owners cared far more about full deregulation than a mere $200 tax. But those warnings fell on deaf ears.

Cornyn and his spineless allies effectively handed DOJ a loophole — one that Bondi’s DOJ is driving a tank straight through.

Congress Warned DOJ: The NFA Is Dead — Start Acting Like It

Gun owners have said it for decades. The Supreme Court said it in 1937. Congress reiterated it in July. But Congressman Andrew Clyde and more than 30 House Republicans put it in black-and-white on November 10th: the NFA is a tax, therefore it is dead.

Clyde’s letter spells out Congress’s intent clearly:

OBBB Section 70436 sets the NFA making/transfer tax at $0.
The Supreme Court in Sonzinsky upheld the NFA solely as a tax measure.
The absence of a tax means there is no constitutional basis for the registry.
Without the tax, the registry cannot legally stand.
Without the tax, there can be no fingerprints, no serial number filings, and no federal permission slips.
Congress killed the NFA’s enforcement mechanism — full stop.

Clyde told DOJ bluntly that the NFA registry on SBRs, SBSs, suppressors, and AOWs is dead, and that DOJ must enforce the law as written.

Bondi’s DOJ responded with open defiance.

DOJ Isn’t Just Targeting the Second Amendment — They’re Targeting the First

As DOJ was filing one brief to resurrect a dead gun registry, they filed another demanding something even more sinister:

The membership lists of gun-rights organizations.

In Firearms Policy Coalition v. Bondi on October 28th, DOJ demanded that gun-rights groups verify their membership or disclose their membership lists outright so DOJ can decide who is “protected” by a court injunction.

This is the exact tactic the Supreme Court has already ruled unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

Even worse, DOJ publicly denied seeking member lists, and Harmeet Dhillon defended DOJ based on those denials — only for DOJ to blindside her with the filing anyway.

This means one of two things: either Bondi is not in control of her own department, or the swamp is going behind her back to carry out anti-gun operations.

This DOJ is not reforming itself. It is not following Congress. It is not respecting the Constitution. It is actively targeting the movement.

Which forces us to ask the question every gun owner is thinking…

Is President Trump Even Aware This Is Happening Inside His DOJ?

If the President is not aware, then someone inside DOJ is deliberately keeping him in the dark. Someone is sabotaging his agenda. Someone is running a shadow DOJ that answers to no one.

If he is aware, then gun owners deserve straight answers as to why this hasn’t been stopped.

Either scenario proves the same chilling truth: in many cases, Bondi’s DOJ is behaving like Garland never left.

We Cannot Count on the Courts

Just days before DOJ launched its twin assault on the Second and First Amendments, Hannah Hill of the National Foundation for Gun Rights issued the most blunt warning the movement has heard in years: “The courts are NOT coming to save you.”

Hill is exactly right.

She explained that judges rule based on ideology. The judiciary is dominated by anti-liberty elites. Most judges do not want to uphold gun rights. The Supreme Court takes only a handful of cases. Lawsuits drag on for years. Bad laws remain in force during the entire fight. And victories are never guaranteed.

Bondi’s DOJ knows this.

That’s why they sprinted to court asking for summary judgment — fast, clean, and without scrutiny.

It is the same playbook leftist bureaucrats have used for decades: delay in court, regulate in the shadows, and outlast the voters.

The courts can delay tyranny, but only gun owners can defeat it.

What Happens Next in the SilencerShop Case

The plaintiffs will soon file their reply citing Congress’s letter, Sonzinsky, and DOJ’s blatant defiance.

The district court will then rule on DOJ’s outrageous request for immediate summary judgment.

The case will almost certainly move to the Fifth Circuit, where Peterson may finally be challenged.

And eventually, the Supreme Court may be forced to confront DOJ’s attempt to resurrect the NFA despite Congress eliminating its legal foundation.

And Here’s What Texas Gun Rights Is Doing Right Now

Texas Gun Rights isn’t sitting around waiting for judges or bureaucrats to suddenly discover the Constitution; we are preparing to file an amicus brief the moment it becomes necessary.

In the meantime, we are backing Congressman Clyde and every member of Congress working to gut what’s left of the NFA, and we are putting President Trump, Attorney General Bondi, and DOJ officials on notice that gun owners are watching.

If this administration does not start acting like it supports the Second Amendment, that failure will reflect very poorly on Republicans seeking office in the midterm elections.

So call the White House at 202-456-1111 and insist that President Trump rein in a DOJ that is actively defending gun registration and resurrecting the NFA.

And if you want Texas Gun Rights to keep mobilizing gun owners to confront every threat to the Second Amendment — no matter who is in charge — then please chip in below to help us turn up the heat.