NFA Challenge

[Lawdog]

Reply brief for summary judgement.

Roberts v ATF.

 

2026.06.24_039_P's_(FPC)_Reply_ISO_MSJ_and_Opposition_to_D's_MSJ.pdf

[John Kloehr]

17 minutes ago, Lawdog said:

Reply brief for summary judgement.

Roberts v ATF.

 

2026.06.24_039_P's_(FPC)_Reply_ISO_MSJ_and_Opposition_to_D's_MSJ.pdf

Bad link. Try:

 

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/16379/attachments/original/1782331534/2026.06.24_039_P's_(FPC)_Reply_ISO_MSJ_and_Opposition_to_D's_MSJ.pdf?1782331534

[Blackwater 53393]

I’m reading this as being narrow in scope.  Are we actually seeing a win here or is this just a stepping stone toward some demolition of NFA?

 

[John Kloehr]

2 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

I’m reading this as being narrow in scope.  Are we actually seeing a win here or is this just a stepping stone toward some demolition of NFA?

 

 

If this is the case I think it is, there are a few convolutions.

 

First, the original pleadings cite the law as it apples to SBSs, SBR,s and Silencers. But the actual lawsuit never again mentions SBSs. Treat this as a side issue but tread with caution, looks like FPC simply does not want to open an unnecessary can of worms. There is a can of worms from a bad and now obsolete ruling, but that ruling is precedential until overturned or at least clarified.

 

Then we get to the tax and registration on at least SBRs and silencers. Congress tried to remove the registration component when drafting the 1BBB but the parliamentarian ruled registration was policy, not fiscal. The bill was passed under reconciliation which requires a simple majority, as long as it does not have policy components (so zero maker and transfer tax). The registration component remained in the law.

 

The government is defending the registration component as necessary to enforce a completely different tax (not maker or transfer), a manufacturer tax. And the government claims the registration is needed to enforce this other tax. Why the 4473 will not serve this purpose? Not explained. I might follow up to see if Harmeet Dhillon is involved or has not touched on this case so far.