This week, we're diving back into the injunction against enforcement of wide swaths of the National Firearms Act (NFA).

That's because, in a bit of a surprise move, the Department of Justice (DOJ) declined to appeal the injunction before the stay on it expired. That led to a symbolic sale of an unregistered silencer between several of the named plaintiffs in the case early Thursday morning. But it has also created a lot of new questions about exactly who and what is covered by the injunction.

To try and bring some clarity to the issue, we've got gun-rights lawyer and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) legal research director Kostas Moros back on the show. SAF is a named plaintiff in a similar case in the Eighth Circuit, and its sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, is a plaintiff in the Texas case. Kostas said the injunction is fairly complex and nobody has all the answers for every potential eventuality.

However, he also said that the ruling appears to be very expansive. He said it enjoins enforcement of many of the NFA regulations associated with silencers, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, and the "any other weapon" category. He said it also covers all named plaintiffs, including all of their members and customers. And it covers both current and future members and customers.

Kostas noted there are a number of caveats, though. For instance, he said it doesn't have any impact on state laws, and many of those could still trip people up. He also said it doesn't cover the entire NFA or even all of the NFA's regulations on the impacted items. He argued there's a lot still left to figure out, and the final answers for many of the open questions will have to come from the DOJ and ATF.

Kostas also discussed the legal strategy at play, including what he'd like to see the DOJ do with a potential appeal and how vulnerable the current legal situation may be.

Special Guest: Kostas Moros.

Reload Founder Stephen Gutowski covers the first legal unregistered silencer sale in nearly 100 years. Then he discusses newly-unearthed videos of Abdul El-Sayed, the Michigan Democratic senate candidate, where he proposes replacing the Second Amendment. He also explains a new federal court ruling on whether the Second Amendment protects unauthorized gun exports. Plus, he looks at reports on a settlement between DOJ and the LA County Sheriff's Office as well as a new DOJ opinion on the Post Office gun ban.

Links:
https://thereload.com/gun-group-republican-candidate-transfer-unregistered-silencer-as-doj-misses-appeal-deadline/
https://thereload.com/analysis-who-and-what-is-covered-by-the-nfa-injunction-member-exclusive/
https://thereload.com/michigans-democratic-senate-candidate-floated-replacing-the-second-amendment/
https://thereload.com/federal-appeals-court-upholds-pennsylvania-mans-conviction-for-unauthorized-gun-shipment-to-haiti/
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-08-13/doj-la-sheriffs-department-settle-lawsuit-concealed-carry-firearm-permit-application-delays
https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2026/08/13/doj-says-post-office-carry-ban-contradicts-federal-law-n1233510

This week, we're taking a close look at a federal judge's decision to strike down a wide swath of National Firearms Act (NFA) regulations.

To do that, we have one of the plaintiffs in the case. Travis White is the President of the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition (FRAC), which filed suit against the NFA the same day the federal government officially slashed a number of NFA taxes to $0. He said that's what made the NFA vulnerable to a challenge, at least the provisions that regulate silencers, short-barrel rifles and shotguns, and what the law calls "any other weapons."

US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix agreed. He ruled that the NFA sections whose taxes were eliminated also lost their constitutional justification. White said the judge was persuaded by the plaintiffs' argument that the NFA is, at its heart, an exercise of Congress's taxing power and its provisions can only stand if they are in furtherance of collecting revenue.

White said Hendrix agreed with FRAC that a $0 tax can't justify imposing registration, fingerprinting, and various other requirements to prove it has been paid. White argued that if a tax doesn't even try to raise funds, then it can't be considered a tax. Hendrix was persuaded.

But that didn't end the inquiry. White said the judge also determined the remaining NFA taxes on machineguns or gun makers don't mean the regulations on the untaxed items can stand. He also brushed aside a justification based on the Necessary and Proper Clause. And he concluded the NFA doesn't fit under the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce either.

Special Guest: Travis White.