FFL News: DOJ Won't Appeal NFA Ruling; Virginia Dealer Unit

By Fred Thompson • Published September 18, 2026

The biggest firearms-legal news of the week is not a new rule — it is the federal government's decision to stop defending an old one. President Trump directed the Justice Department not to appeal the ruling that gutted the National Firearms Act's registration scheme, and a DOJ official says the department intends to tell Congress as much. For FFL dealers, the operational question is narrower than the headline: what can you actually do at the counter on Monday? Less than customers will assume. Here is the week in five stories, with the dealer-facing read on each.

1. Trump orders DOJ to stand down on the NFA ruling

On August 5, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix (N.D. Tex.) held in Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF — consolidated with Jensen v. ATF — that the NFA's registration and approval requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns cannot be sustained under the taxing power after Congress zeroed out the transfer and making taxes in the 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The permanent injunction took effect August 13 after the government declined to seek an emergency stay.

This week's development, first reported by CBS News on September 17, is that the President personally ordered DOJ not to appeal, and the department intends to notify Congress of that decision. The practical effect: the 60-day appeal window that opened with the August 5 judgment closes in the first week of October with no appeal in it, and the injunction stands as the operating reality for the parties it names. CBS notes the ruling reaches current and future members of the gun groups that sued, and expressly does not touch AR-15s or Glock pistols, which are regulated under a different federal statute.

2. What actually changes at the counter — and what does not

The injunction is party-specific, not a repeal. Under the Supreme Court's 2025 Trump v. CASA decision, a district court cannot hand down a universal injunction, so Judge Hendrix tailored relief to the parties before him. Use this as the working map:

Coverage is a relationship, not a ZIP code. Relief runs to the named plaintiffs and, as applicable, their agencies, political subdivisions, members and current-or-future customers. The membership route — joining one of the plaintiff organizations — is the only path to coverage that does not depend on which retailer the customer buys from.
The Gun Control Act still applies in full. Every transfer of a covered item still runs through a Form 4473 and a NICS background check. The injunction removed NFA requirements; it did not remove the 1968 framework.
Section 922(b)(4) is the trap for SBR and SBS retail transfers. That unchallenged GCA provision independently bars a licensee from delivering a short-barreled rifle or shotgun to a non-licensee absent Attorney General authorization — which in practice has meant an approved Form 4. The injunction removes the NFA requirement but supplies no replacement authorization mechanism. Until ATF publishes guidance or a new form, voluntary Form 4 processing is the clean path for those items. Suppressors and "any other weapons" are not listed in 922(b)(4).
Machine guns and destructive devices are untouched — they keep the $200 tax and the full NFA process.
State law is untouched. Where a state bans or restricts suppressors or keeps its own registration scheme, the federal injunction does nothing for a customer standing in your shop.

Two operational rules follow. First, do not treat a customer's claim of membership as legal authority for skipping paperwork — ask for documentation and keep a copy in the file. Second, get your own written read from counsel before your staff is trained on any new counter procedure. An FFL that improvises here is carrying 100% of the risk and none of the protection.

3. Virginia builds a dealer enforcement unit

Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones announced Tuesday the creation of the Firearms Accountability & Industry Responsibility (FAIR) Unit, housed in the office's Civil and Criminal Justice & Public Safety divisions, to investigate and bring civil enforcement actions against firearm industry members under the state's Firearm Industry Standards of Responsible Conduct. Those powers took effect July 1.

The statute is written broadly on purpose. It covers dealers, manufacturers, distributors, importers and marketers of firearms, ammunition, components and accessories, and it requires "reasonable controls" over the sale, distribution, use and marketing of those products. The office can issue civil investigative demands, seek injunctions, restitution, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorney fees, and it is actively hiring litigators, prosecutors and investigators for the unit. Note that marketing is inside the scope.

For Virginia dealers — and for out-of-state dealers who ship into Virginia — the useful response is documentation, not argument: written straw-purchase red-flag procedures, staff training with dates and sign-offs, marketing review before publication, and one named person accountable for compliance. The enforcement theory depends on showing what a dealer knew or should have known, and records are how a shop wins that argument.

4. FBI director confirms NICS Monitoring

At a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on September 15, Sen. Ted Cruz asked FBI Director Kash Patel about NICS Monitoring — a program Gun Owners of America surfaced through a 2021 FOIA request that alerts federal investigators when a person they have flagged later attempts a firearm purchase. Patel answered: "Yes."

The FOIA records describe monitoring requested for 30 to 180 days at a time and renewable indefinitely, with ATF among the requesting agencies. ATF Director Robert Cekada has since narrowed the alert policy to federal firearms-trafficking violations, and critics argue that the practice conflicts with 28 C.F.R. sections 25.6(c)(2) and 25.8(g), which bar use of NICS to investigate a person unrelated to a proposed transfer.

Nothing in your workflow changes. The check your shop initiates is still a one-time point-of-sale query, and monitoring is run by the agencies, not by the dealer. Expect customers to ask about it; give them the factual account and do not speculate. If your store receives an ATF information request tied to a monitored buyer, route it to counsel before responding.

5. The state-level front is splitting in two directions

The same week Virginia moved to police dealers, Missouri moved to deregulate — the clearest illustration yet that firearms compliance is now a state-by-state patchwork rather than a single federal floor.

Missouri: Attorney General Catherine Hanaway and Jefferson County Sheriff Dave Marshak filed suit against ATF on September 8 in the Eastern District of Missouri, arguing that federal registration requirements for short-barreled rifles and suppressors are unconstitutional now that Congress removed the tax. Marshak joined as a private resident, not in his official capacity, and the county is not funding the case. Local coverage ran September 17.
San Jose: The Justice Department sued the city on September 16 over a carry-permit fee approaching $1,600, calling it an unconstitutional "exorbitant fee." Separate from the NFA fight, but the same theme: courts are being asked to price-test the cost of exercising the right.
Parks carry: The Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition filed a cert petition Wednesday in Christian v. James, asking the Supreme Court to review the Second Circuit's decision upholding New York's ban on carrying in public parks. Add it to a 2A docket that is filling up.

On the horizon: the taxes themselves

Second Amendment Foundation research director Kostas Moros published a law review article arguing that special taxes singling out common firearms and ammunition are unconstitutional under the historical test in Bruen — California's 11% excise tax, Colorado's 6.5%, and the federal Pittman-Robertson excise tax that has funded conservation since 1937. The paper drew public pushback from within the industry, precisely because Pittman-Robertson revenue flows to wildlife and range programs. No dealer action today: you still collect and remit what your state requires. But treat it as a leading indicator for pricing and record-keeping fights over the next few cycles.

Five moves for the week ahead

Get written counsel guidance on the NFA injunction's coverage before any employee tells a customer that no Form 4 is required.
Build a counter script and a coverage checklist — membership documentation, transaction scope, and the 4473/NICS reminder — so the answer is the same from every employee.
If you operate in or ship to Virginia, run a documentation audit now: training records, straw-purchase SOPs, and a review pass on current marketing.
Leave Form 4473 and NICS discipline exactly as it is, and log any exception request with the reasoning behind it.
Put the 2A court calendar and your state AG's activity on a monthly review — that is where your compliance cost is being set.

This digest is reporting and analysis for firearms industry operators, not legal advice. Verify any compliance decision with qualified counsel in your jurisdiction.

Sources

CBS News, "Trump ordered DOJ not to appeal ruling that loosened limits on 'gangster weapons,' sources say" (Sept. 17, 2026)
Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, No. 6:25-cv-00056-H, Memorandum Opinion and Order (N.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2026); NRA-ILA Q&A on the Texas NFA case (Aug. 17, 2026); Texas Tribune (Aug. 13, 2026)
Wiley Rein client alert, "NFA Court Ruling Reshapes Compliance" (922(b)(4) and Form 4473 analysis)
Breitbart and The Center Square, Virginia FAIR Unit coverage (Sept. 16-17, 2026); Virginia AG announcement (Sept. 15, 2026)
The Truth About Guns and AmmoLand News, NICS Monitoring coverage (Sept. 16-17, 2026); Townhall (Sept. 16, 2026)
Leader Publications / myleaderpaper.com, "Sheriff, AG sue to end some firearm registrations" (Sept. 17, 2026)
U.S. Department of Justice, "Justice Department Sues San Jose for Unconstitutional $1600 Firearm Permit Fee" (Sept. 16, 2026)
Bearing Arms and Tampa Free Press coverage of SAF's firearms-tax law review article (Sept. 17, 2026)

— Fred Thompson, [email protected]