By Dave Workman
A federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act “with respect to the untaxed firearms it purports to regulate” and “with respect to suppressors and short-barreled rifles” on Second Amendment grounds, has been filed by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
The case is known as Jensen v. ATF. The federal complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division.
Joining CCRKBA are the FPC Action Foundation, Texas State Rifle Association, Hot Shots Custom, and three private citizens, all Texas residents. They are represented by attorneys R. Brent Cooper at Cooper & Scully in Dallas, Texas, and David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson and Nicholas A. Varone at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C.
Named as defendants are the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Department of Justice, and Acting ATF Director Daniel P. Driscoll and Attorney General Pamela Bondi, in their official capacities.
The lawsuit notes the NFA imposed a $200 excise tax on the making and transfer of what the act defines as a “firearm.” Additionally, the lawsuit states, “The NFA also creates a burdensome registration scheme that a maker, transferor, or transferee must comply with to lawfully make, transfer, or receive the firearm…Among other items, the NFA’s definition of ‘firearm’ applies to suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and ‘any other weapon.’”
But the excise tax was erased by passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill earlier this year, and according to CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “Because the taxes have been eliminated, the NFA, with regard to nearly all of the affected firearms, has really outlived its regulatory usefulness under Congress’ enumerated powers.”
“We’re asking the court to declare further regulation of these now-untaxed firearms, and of suppressors and short-barreled rifles is unconstitutional, and should be enjoined,” he said.
The Second Amendment Foundation released a statement confirming that it is supporting this lawsuit.
“With the tax now set to $0, the remaining registration requirements for these arms under the NFA have no constitutional basis,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Completely removing them from the NFA is now a must, and this suit aims to eradicate the barriers to the exercise of the Second Amendment. SAF is already a plaintiff in its own lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of these elements of the NFA, and now our sister organization the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is joining the fight as a plaintiff with our financial backing in this companion case.”
According to the 32-page complaint, the NFA, which is described by the court as “an interrelated statutory system for the taxation of certain firearms,” no longer meets its purpose under the constitution because passage of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” eliminated taxes with respect to manufacturing, transferring and receiving products defined as “firearms” or “any other weapons” under the NFA. However, now that the taxes have been eliminated for nearly all firearms covered by the NFA except for machineguns and “destructive devices,” the firearms are still subject to registration and regulation under provisions in the NFA.
“If suppressors and short-barreled rifles qualify as arms,” said Gottlieb, “they are protected by the Second Amendment, and the government must now prove a historical tradition of regulating such arms. However, no such regulatory tradition exists, so further regulation by the ATF is unconstitutional.”
