A federal judge in Texas has ruled that the federal government can no longer enforce key registration requirements for firearm suppressors, short‑barreled rifles, and short‑barreled shotguns against plaintiffs in a lawsuit brought by Kansas and 14 other states, handing a major victory to Second Amendment advocates.

U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas ruled Wednesday that provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA) requiring registration, reporting, and recordkeeping for those firearms and accessories exceed Congress’ constitutional authority. The requirements continued despite passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which reduced the NFA’s transfer and manufacturing tax on suppressors, short‑barreled rifles, short‑barreled shotguns, and certain other firearms to $0 beginning Jan. 1, 2026.

“The challenged NFA provisions are unconstitutional,” Hendrix wrote, concluding that once Congress eliminated the transfer and making taxes for the affected firearms, “the regulatory provisions cannot be upheld under the taxing power” because they no longer generate revenue. The judge also rejected the Justice Department’s argument that the regulations could instead be justified under Congress’ commerce clause authority, finding Congress enacted the law solely under its taxing power.

The court permanently barred the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) from enforcing those requirements against the states, organizations, businesses, and individuals who sued. However, the judge declined to issue a nationwide injunction, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, which limits universal injunctions to nonparties. The ruling applies only to the plaintiffs in the case, including residents of the 15 participating states, and does not automatically invalidate the NFA registration requirements nationwide.

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach hailed the ruling as a landmark victory for Second Amendment advocates. “Today, the state of Kansas and our fellow plaintiffs won a great victory against the U.S. Department of Justice, which had been wrongly defending an unconstitutional law. The federal government has no right to demand that American citizens ask for permission before putting an accessory on their firearm to protect their hearing,” Kobach said.

Kobach described the decision as a very significant ruling for gun rights, saying it reinforces constitutional limits on federal power while removing what he called unnecessary barriers for law‑abiding gun owners. “Our Constitution provides for a government of limited powers at the federal level. We must always be vigilant to enforce those constitutional limits, especially when government overreach threatens the right of Americans to keep and bear arms,” he added.

The lawsuit was filed by Kansas, Texas, Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming, along with firearms manufacturers, retailers, advocacy organizations, and individual gun owners. The plaintiffs argued that Congress’ decision to eliminate the NFA taxes stripped away the constitutional foundation for the law’s registration requirements.

Rather than deciding whether the regulations also violated the Second Amendment, Hendrix ruled solely on Article I constitutional grounds, finding the registration provisions exceeded Congress’ enumerated powers after the tax was repealed. The judge said resolving the Second Amendment claims was unnecessary because the plaintiffs received the same practical relief through the court’s ruling. The Justice Department may appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.