BELLEVUE, WA — The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) announced the filing of a second major federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act (NFA) following the recent elimination of NFA taxes under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (BBB). The new lawsuit, Jensen v. ATF, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The case seeks to strike down the NFA’s registration requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs), and “Any Other Weapons” (AOWs) on the grounds that the tax basis for those regulations no longer exists.

Since its creation in 1934, the NFA has required Americans who wish to own certain firearms to pay a $200 tax and register their items with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). However, when Congress passed the BBB Act in July 2025, it set the NFA tax on most of those items to $0 but left the registration requirement in place.

“With the tax now set to zero, the remaining registration requirements for these arms under the NFA have no constitutional basis,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Completely removing them from the NFA is now a must, and this suit aims to eradicate the barriers to the exercise of the Second Amendment.”

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), the FPC Action Foundation, the Texas Rifle Association, Hot Shots Custom LLC, and three individual Texas residents.

“This is the best opportunity in a generation to eliminate major portions of the NFA since its inception nearly a century ago,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “The government is going to be hard-pressed to justify the law as a tax without a tax, and the type of regulation of Second Amendment-protected arms seen in the NFA is without any historical support. We’re hopeful its days are numbered.”

The complaint argues that with no tax remaining, the NFA’s registration scheme no longer serves any constitutional purpose under Congress’s taxing power. It also claims the law violates the Second Amendment by imposing burdensome registration requirements on commonly owned firearms and accessories such as suppressors and SBRs—items that the plaintiffs argue are neither dangerous nor unusual and are used safely by millions of lawful owners across the United States.

The case seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, asking the court to block ATF and the Department of Justice from enforcing NFA registration rules for untaxed items.

SAF’s support of this companion case underscores a growing effort by pro-Second Amendment organizations to dismantle longstanding federal gun regulations they view as inconsistent with both the Constitution and modern firearms ownership.

As challenges to federal firearms laws continue to mount following the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, this case could mark another significant test of how far the courts will extend constitutional protections for arms regulated under the NFA.