NRA-ILA | Questions and Answers About the Texas NFA Case

On August 12, we reported on an important development in the ongoing litigation over the National Firearms Act (NFA) filed by multiple plaintiffs in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. These included, with NRA’s support, our state affiliate, the Texas State Rifle Association (TSRA).

That update concerned the expiration of the court’s emergency stay of its own decision enjoining enforcement of certain provisions of the NFA because they exceeded the congressional taxing power under which the law was enacted.

The stay was meant to give the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) time to appeal the decision or to ask for a longer stay while it contemplated its response. So far, the government has done neither, effectively allowing the court’s decision and order to go into effect.

That is, however, far from the end of matters. As usual, the Internet rumor mill has been working overtime, and a lot of false information, hearsay, and speculation are being passed off as fact. The simple truth is that procedures for this uncharted legal terrain are still being determined.

To help affected parties navigate this challenging transition, we have prepared the following Q&A.

Note: This is general information only and should not be considered legal advice. For advice on how the decision applies to your specific circumstances, you must contact an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

Q: What was this case about, and what did the court decide?

This was a pair of consolidated cases—Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and the NRA-supported Jensen v. ATF—brought in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiffs challenged the continued enforcement of certain National Firearms Act (NFA) registration and approval requirements for suppressors (silencers), short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns after Congress eliminated the NFA’s transfer and making taxes on those items.

On August 5, 2026, Judge Wesley Hendrix held that those registration and approval requirements exceed Congress’s constitutional authority once the taxes were removed. The court issued a permanent injunction (initially stayed until August 12, 2026) blocking enforcement of the challenged provisions against the plaintiff groups, their members, and customers (current and future) as applicable. The injunction does not apply to all eligible NFA purchasers or to all NFA items.

Q: Does the court’s decision overturn the NFA?

No. The decision does not overturn or invalidate the National Firearms Act as a whole. It holds only that specific registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns (and “any other weapons” for one group of plaintiffs) exceed Congress’s constitutional authority after the related taxes were eliminated.

Other NFA provisions, related federal statutes (such as restrictions on transferring or transporting short-barreled rifles and shotguns), the Special Occupational Tax regime, and requirements for other NFA items remain enforceable. The injunction is also limited in scope to the parties in the case and those covered downstream.

Q: Can I take advantage of this decision?

The injunction is limited to the parties in the consolidated cases (Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF and the NRA-supported Jensen v. ATF), plus (where applicable) their agencies, political subdivisions, members, and customers—both current and future.

The court’s order indicates the decision’s protections generally flow “downstream” in the chain of commerce. Manufacturers, distributors, and dealers generally need to be a plaintiff or a member of a covered group, but customers of those businesses will likely be covered even if they are not members of specific plaintiffs groups themselves.

The SSF parties include B&T USA, Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Palmetto State Armory, Silencerco Weapons Research, Silencer Shop Foundation, the states of Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming, and several individuals.

The Jensen parties include the Texas State Rifle Association (NRA’s Texas affiliate), Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, FPC Action Foundation, Hot Shots Custom, and several individuals.

NRA has partnered with TSRA to offer joint membership for those interested (this is one way to ensure coverage under the injunction but not necessarily the only way).

Q: Does this mean I can buy an NFA firearm from an FFL without a background check?

No. The decision addresses NFA registration and approval requirements for specific items. It does not eliminate background checks that apply under other federal or state laws when purchasing from a licensed dealer.

Q: Does this mean I can buy an NFA firearm without a Form 4?

For covered parties (and their members/customers as applicable), the NFA’s registration and approval requirements that involve Form 4 (and related processes) for silencers, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns are enjoined. However, other federal restrictions (such as those under 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(4) for short-barreled rifles and shotguns) were not enjoined, and compliance with former NFA procedures may still be needed for certain transfers until further government action or clarification.

NRA and other plaintiffs are working to come to shared understandings with federal and (where relevant) state officials for procedures applicable to transactions subject to the court’s injunction.

Q: Can I assemble a Short-Barreled Firearm or Suppressor

The injunction also applies to the NFA registration and application requirements on making these firearms. It should be possible for individuals covered by the injunction to lawfully make these firearms without following the NFA process, however, 26 U.S.C. § 5842(a) still requires individuals to follow the NFA’s marking requirements. ATF has proposed a rule that may address this by allowing an individual making a firearm to incorporate existing markings on the firearm’s frame or receiver.

Q: Does Judge Hendrix’s decision mean the NFA violates the Second Amendment?

No. The court held that the National Firearms Act’s registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns exceed Congress’s constitutional authority after Congress eliminated the NFA’s transfer and making taxes on those arms. It does not declare the entire NFA unconstitutional. Other provisions remain in place, and the injunction is limited in scope to the parties and covered items.

Other pending NRA cases have challenged the NFA under the Second Amendment, and decisions are still awaited.

Q: What NFA items are covered by the decision?

Silencers (suppressors), short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns for the covered parties. The injunction also includes “any other weapons” for the SSF parties only.

Q: What provisions of the NFA can no longer be enforced against the plaintiff group, and what do those provisions mean?

The NFA’s registration and approval requirements are enjoined as to the covered items: 26 U.S.C. § 5812(a)–(b); 26 U.S.C. § 5822; 26 U.S.C. § 5841(a)–(c), (e); 26 U.S.C. § 5861(b)–(f); 27 C.F.R. § 479.62(a)–(d); and 27 C.F.R. § 479.84(a)–(d). These generally involve the processes for registering, transferring, or making the covered NFA items and obtaining ATF approval.

Certain marking requirements (26 U.S.C. § 5842(b) and 26 U.S.C. § 5861(i)) are enjoined with respect to the Jensen parties only. It appears the government will not be able to enforce those marking requirements against Jensen parties’ members and customers who possess firearms covered by the injunction (the government has not opined on the effect of this aspect of the decision).

Q: Are there other provisions of the NFA or other federal gun control laws that remain enforceable against the plaintiff group?

Yes. Key examples include:

• 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(4), which restricts licensed dealers/manufacturers/etc. from selling or delivering short-barreled shotguns or short-barreled rifles except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General consistent with public safety and necessity. Past NFA compliance was treated as such authorization. Without further clarification from the government, former procedures may still be required to satisfy this requirement.
• 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(4) regarding interstate transportation of short-barreled shotguns and rifles (authorization still required; ATF has proposed streamlining approval in an unrelated administrative action).
• The existing Special Occupational Tax (SOT) regime for dealers in NFA firearms.

The injunction does not cover machineguns, destructive devices, or other NFA items whose taxes were not eliminated.

Q: How does the law of my state or locality affect my ability to take advantage of this decision?

Several states require compliance or registration under the NFA as a matter of state law. The federal injunction does not directly affect those state laws, though it may have indirect effects (for example, if federal NFA registration is no longer required for certain items, a state law that simply requires “compliance with the NFA” may not be violated by otherwise lawful possession without registration). ATF has not indicated it will stop processing NFA forms, so purchasers in those states could still follow the NFA process to satisfy state requirements. NRA is working with state attorneys general on these issues. Likewise, those states with existing bans on these items are unaffected by the injunction. Always check your specific state and local laws.

Q: Has DOJ appealed the decision?

The court’s order was stayed until August 12, 2026, to allow the government time to seek relief. As of press time (August 17), the Department of Justice has not filed an emergency appeal, and the injunction went into effect on August 13. DOJ still has several weeks left to appeal, if it so chooses.

Q: Will DOJ appeal the decision?

This is unknown. DOJ has stated it respects Second Amendment rights and is assessing the impact of the ruling. Plans for a full appeal have not been publicly confirmed. Reports of unnamed DOJ or federal sources indicating no appeal is forthcoming are unconfirmed.

Q: Can the court reimpose its stay, with or without a request from DOJ?

Yes. An injunction can be dissolved or stayed with very little notice. Courts retain authority to modify, stay, or reinstate stays on their own orders, including in response to a request from a party such as the Department of Justice or on the court’s own initiative (particularly if an appeal is pursued). Taking actions in reliance on the injunction carries risk precisely because of this possibility.

Q: What should I do?

Stay tuned to www.nraila.org as we provide updates on this unfolding situation. Above all, be patient and kind with your FFL, as FFLs are on the front lines of a legally complex and evolving landscape. Misunderstanding the state of play could result in serious legal and business consequences for those involved. Therefore, if you want to obtain an NFA item covered by the court’s injunctions, you should be prepared to comply with the process your FFL is using.

Q: What should FFLs do?

FFLs should consult with their legal counsel to formulate a strategy. They should be aware, however, that the current situation could change at any time. DOJ could appeal, for example, and the stay could be reimposed. Decisions are also expected in other cases, and they could further complicate the picture.

FFLs should be judicious about their sources of information and resist taking cues from Internet influencers who may have more followers than legal credentials.

Q: What are the applicable statutes of limitations and penalties if a later proceeding overturns the district court’s decision and order?

For violations of the NFA itself, the statute of limitations is found in 26 U.S.C.A. § 6531 of the Internal Revenue Code. This generally imposes a three-year statute of limitations. Most violations of the Gun Control Act pertaining to NFA provisions would be subject to 18 U.S.C. § 3282, which imposes a five-year statute of limitations. Note, however, that some violations of either statute, such as unlawful possession of a firearm, are considered “continuing offenses” under which the statute of limitations does not run until the behavior is abandoned.