A court order that on firearm suppressors and certain guns took effect Thursday after the U.S. Justice Department did not file an appeal before a seven-day deadline set by a federal judge in Texas.
The ruling allows people to purchase silencers, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and certain other firearms without registration, while also removing an extra layer of background checks.
The order benefits parties that brought the lawsuit, including some dealers based outside northern Texas, but it is not a national injunction. Advocates say there are similar challenges in federal courts in other states. Separately, some states have their own prohibitions on silencers.
U.S. District Judge James Hendrix in Lubbock, Texas, said regulations in a 1930s-era law are unconstitutional. He said the rules must fall after the Republican-controlled Congress and President Donald Trump on the devices.
Hendrix said his would take effect in seven days unless the government appealed. There was no sign of a filing Wednesday in online entries at Hendrix’s court or the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The government鈥檚 refusal to pursue an immediate appeal 鈥渋s a failure to defend public safety,鈥� said Emma Brown, executive director at Giffords, the gun violence prevention group.
An email Thursday seeking comment from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which enforces the law, was not immediately answered. Under court procedure, the government still could file an appeal in the weeks ahead, even while Hendrix’s order stands.
Gun Owners of America said two members acquired suppressors at Silencer Shop in Leander, Texas, without having to register.
鈥淥ur members are putting the historic victory into action. The era of federal registration for constitutionally protected arms must end,鈥� said Erich Pratt, the group’s senior vice president.
The National Firearms Act has been around since 1934 in response to concerns about mafia violence. It regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, though gun-rights advocates say it conflicts with the Constitution’s Second Amendment.
鈥淭he system of regulating these weapons has been effective. The need is no less today than it was after the Prohibition era almost a century ago,鈥� said Giffords chief counsel Adam Skaggs.
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
