We’ve previously documented how the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice has taken the wrong side in court cases challenging the National Firearms Act (NFA), now that the $200 tax has been removed.
President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, signed on July 4, removed the $200 tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), shot-barreled shotguns (SBSs), and NFA-defined any other weapons (AOW). The measure would have removed those items from the NFA entirely, but a Senate parliamentarian determined that it would violate the Byrd Act, so the language was removed.
Now, lawmakers, disgruntled that the DOJ is fighting to preserve the NFA, have sent a letter to DOJ leaders explaining that Congress intended to completely repeal the NFA and asking the DOJ to stop defending the law in court.
The letter, authored by U.S. Sen. Steve Daines, R-Montana, and U.S. Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Georgia, puts U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on notice about what the original congressional intent was concerning the NFA.
“We write to inform the Department of Justice of Congress’s position and intent regarding ongoing litigation challenging the National Firearms Act’s (NFA) registration and transfer requirements for non-taxed NFA firearms, following the enactment of President Trump’s landmark Second Amendment victory in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA),” the December 11 letter stated. “In enacting this bill into law, Congress affirmed its position that the taxation and registration provisions of the National Firearms Act are inseparably linked, and it expressed its intent to repeal the NFA’s registration and transfer requirements by eliminating the associated taxes on certain firearms and silencers.”
Consequently, when the DOJ recently filed court documents supporting the NFA, Sen. Daine and Rep. Clyde were not happy about it.
“In light of the Department’s recent filing opposing this interpretation, we must express our serious concern and disappointment that the Department of Justice has chosen to advance a theory that not only conflicts with Congress’s express intent but also disregards the constitutional structure upon which the NFA has rested since 1934,” the letter continued. “Therefore, we again urge the Department of Justice to adopt and advance Congress’s stated position in all litigation concerning these provisions, to ensure that congressional intent is accurately represented and upheld before the courts.”
According to Rep. Clyde and Sen. Daines, the killing of the Obamacare penalty set a precedent that the DOJ should follow in this case.
“In fact, when Congress reduced the Obamacare penalty to $0 during President Trump’s first term, the Department of Justice refused to defend the underlying flawed law,” the letter stated. “The Department is fully empowered to decline to defend statutory provisions that no longer rest on a valid constitutional basis. It has exercised that authority before, and it must do so again here—this time in defense of Americans’ Second Amendment rights.”
Ultimately, the lawmakers asked Bondi and the DOJ to do an about-face on their support of what remains of the NFA.
“Accordingly, we urge the Department of Justice to adopt the position of the drafters of this provision: that the transfer and registration requirements cannot stand without the corresponding excise tax,” the letter concluded. “We further urge the Department to reconsider its recent opposition brief and to ensure that future filings reflect Congress’s clear directive regarding the NFA’s taxation-registration linkage.”
In mid-November, Rep. Clyde and 19 other members of the U.S. House of Representatives had sent a letter to AG Bondi urging the administration to support their push to end the NFA. But a recent court defense of the NFA apparently prompted Sen. Daines to become involved and to co-author the most recent letter.
