In the case of Silencer Shop Foundation v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), U.S. District Court Judge James Wesley Hendrix found that the requirements exceeded Congress's constitutional authority once the NFA's taxes on making or transferring those arms were eliminated. The taxes were reduced to zero last year.

The court found that the NFA, as enacted in 1934, passed constitutional muster as an act of Congress's taxing power because the regulatory requirements—including registration, applications, ATF approval, fingerprinting, and related criminal penalties—aided the collection of NFA taxes.

This is in line with the 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case, Sonzinsky v. United States, in which the high court ruled the NFA is a legal exercise of Congress's taxing authority. In that decision, the court found that the government could gather information on the owners of certain firearms and their accessories that were subject to the NFA's $200 excise as part of the tax collection process.

Wednesday's ruling in response to two consolidated cases—Jensen v. ATF, with Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF—in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, held that once Congress eliminated the taxes for suppressors, the constitutional foundation for registration was eliminated as well.

"In sum, the Court concludes that the challenged NFA provisions exceed Congress's Article I enumerated powers and are therefore unconstitutional," Hendrix's ruling states.

On July 4, 2025, President Donald Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" reduced the NFA's excise tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and a category labeled "any other weapon" from $200 to $0. However, the items were still required to be registered under the NFA.

Machine guns and destructive devices are still subject to the $200 tax and its requirements. Under Hendrix's ruling, the category "any other weapons" is still subject to the requirements even though it is not taxed.

The court has issued a permanent injunction against enforcement of the requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns, but leaves them in place for the "any other weapons" category.

Hendrix stayed his decision for seven days to allow the government to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The government argued that the provisions were justified under the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause.