Gun rights advocates are celebrating after the Trump administration declined to appeal a federal court ruling that struck down key registration requirements for firearm suppressors and certain weapons, marking a significant rollback of regulations dating back more than 90 years.
Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA), a former gun store owner who helped lead the legislative effort behind the change, described the development as “the greatest restoration” of Second Amendment rights in nearly a century.
The dispute centers on the National Firearms Act of 1934, which imposed a $200 tax and federal registration requirements on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and certain other firearms.
Republicans eliminated the tax by reducing it to $0 through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year.
Gun rights organizations subsequently argued in court that once Congress eliminated the tax, the federal government no longer had the constitutional basis to maintain the accompanying registration requirements.
A federal judge agreed with the challengers, although the ruling applies to the parties involved in the lawsuit rather than operating as a nationwide injunction, according to the Associated Press.
The Trump administration then allowed the deadline to appeal the decision to pass Thursday, clearing the way for the ruling to take effect without further intervention from the Justice Department.
Clyde argued that taxing the exercise of a constitutional right was fundamentally problematic.
“If you can tax something legitimately, then you can actually destroy it through increased taxation,” Clyde told Fox News Digital.
“You might, quote, ‘have a right on paper,’ but you don’t really have a right because you can’t afford the right. Is that really a right? It’s not,” he continued.
Clyde said eliminating the tax also undermined the justification for the federal registration system attached to it.
“So here we are removing the taxation on a constitutional right from a bill that was passed in 1934,” Clyde said. “And once you remove the tax aspect of it, then you remove the constitutionality of the registration aspect.”
The Georgia Republican called the outcome an “incredible win for the Second Amendment” and said he hoped additional victories would follow.
Clyde was among 48 Republican lawmakers who urged Attorney General Todd Blanche not to challenge the federal court decision.
“An appeal would prolong regulatory uncertainty for law-abiding gun owners and businesses and would consume DOJ resources defending a position that this Congress and now a federal district court has said cannot stand,” the lawmakers wrote.
The Justice Department ultimately declined to appeal.
Clyde also framed the Second Amendment as an important safeguard for the other constitutional rights guaranteed to Americans.
“When you protect the Second Amendment, which protects every other amendment in the entire Constitution — I think that’s the teeth behind the Constitution,” he said.
Gun rights groups celebrated the administration’s decision as another significant development in President Donald Trump’s broader push to expand Second Amendment protections.
The move, however, has drawn fierce opposition from gun control organizations, as Fox News reported.
Kris Brown, president of Brady: United Against Gun Violence, accused the federal government of failing to protect public safety by allowing the ruling to take effect.
“Today, our government is failing us,” Brown said in a statement Thursday.
Brown criticized the deregulation of suppressors, short-barreled rifles and shotguns, arguing that the Justice Department should have appealed the ruling.
“The Department of Justice had the opportunity to act to protect our safety, but it failed to do so,” Brown said.
The latest development follows decades in which the National Firearms Act subjected the affected weapons and devices to heightened federal requirements.
While the court’s ruling is limited in scope and does not constitute a nationwide injunction invalidating the requirements for everyone, the administration’s decision not to appeal represents another victory for gun rights groups challenging longstanding federal firearms regulations.
For Clyde, who built his career in the firearms industry before entering Congress, the change represents the culmination of a legislative and legal effort to dismantle restrictions that have existed since 1934.
