Mark Smith discusses the recent DOJ brief in Jensen v. ATF, challenging aspects of the National Firearms Act (NFA). Although the 2025 “One Big Beautiful Bill” removed the $200 tax on items like suppressors and short-barreled rifles/shotguns, the DOJ continues to enforce registration, fingerprinting, and background check requirements. Smith argues these requirements now lack a constitutional basis, since the original justification—taxation under Article I—no longer exists, and the DOJ’s fallback argument relying on the Commerce Clause is weak.
He also criticizes the DOJ’s handling of Second Amendment law in the brief, claiming it misapplies the Bruen framework, misstates legal precedent, and inconsistently cites cases. Smith frames these as unforced errors that undermine Second Amendment protections and urges better oversight of DOJ briefs going forward.
Bottom line: The DOJ is defending NFA regulations that Smith believes are now unconstitutional and poorly argued, creating unnecessary legal risk and confusion for gun owners.
BREAKING NEWS! DOJ FILES AWFUL NFA BRIEF FULL OF FLAWS (Video)

