Silencer Shop, Jensen, Rep. Clyde, and the DOJ (NFA)

[John Kloehr]

A bit to lay out here. The OBBB reduced the NFA tax to $0 on certain items, but the parliamentarian determined removing the registration components involved policy (not financial).

 

Two suits (District Court, N.D. Texas) are challenging the registration requirement:

 

Silencer Shop v ATF:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70709999/silencer-shop-foundation-v-bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco-firearms-and/

 

Jensen v ATF:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71599866/jensen-v-bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco-firearms-and-explosives/

 

Both have plaintiffs complaints on file, and lots of housekeeping completed, but do not yet have a DOJ response. Enter Representative Andrew Clyde from Georgia's 9th congressional district. He has sent a letter (with numerous signatures) to Pam Bondi:

 

 

 

The letter is a good read. Hopefully I will feel the same when I read the DOJ response to the two cases.

 

 

[Blackwater 53393]

CAN I GET AN AMEN!

 

[Vail Vigilante]

AMEN

[John Kloehr]

A third District Court case, Brown v ATF, in E. D. Missouri :

 

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70994240/brown-v-bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco-firearms-and-explosives/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

 

The ATF answer, while denying most things, did not really defend the registration requirement as much as simply acknowledging it is still part of the body of law and the ATF is tasked with enforcing it. The filing made 10/17, well before the Clyde letter:

 

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/14003/attachments/original/1760971097/2025.10.17_019_D's_Answer.pdf?1760971097

 

While the DOJ makes denials to the extent they are proper by boilerplate, the filing did not make any arguments as such to defend the registration requirement. Also the usual things like:

 

"

1. Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
2. The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over one or more claims or requests for relief.

3. ...

"

 

The plaintiffs have since asked for summary judgment, will see how the DOJ responds. Cross motion? An argument? Silence? Agreement? At minimum, I expect the recent pattern of asking any relief be limited to the actual parties to the suit, and only in the region the court has jurisdiction, to continue (because reasons previously discussed).