President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice says the 2nd Amendment does not cover suppressors.
The 5th Circuit, with a three-judge panel, opined in February that the Second Amendment did not cover suppressors. That opinion is currently being appealed for a full panel opinion.
Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Simpson filed a brief on behalf of the DOJ, agreeing with the 5th Circuit’s opinion. The brief said, in part,
“The panel correctly held that a suppressor is not an “arm” within the meaning of the Second Amendment. The panel’s decision is consistent with every case to decide the issue, including two courts of appeal.”
While the courts are rarely going to be friends of the Second Amendment, we had some hope that a new DOJ would be more helpful. However, that may not be the case.
The insanity of saying the 2nd Amendment does not cover suppressors can not be overstated.
Are scopes not covered? What about magazines? What about any number of accessories for your firearms?
Even 26 U.S. Code 5845 includes suppressors in the definition of firearms.
Some gun owners may say, “Well, that’s fine then. Remove it from the NFA, and stop charging me $200 for the stamp.” Certainly, it would be nice if it were not regulated under the NFA, but the real problem is the NFA.
While we understand that argument, we do not want to start letting states and local municipalities regulate suppressors because the Second Amendment does not cover them. The precedent of saying suppressors aren’t covered will be terrible for other accessories in the future.
You have to wonder who in President Donald Trump’s DOJ decided to go against gun owners on this issue. What input, if any, did Attorney General Pam Bondi have on this decision?
The DOJ’s attack on suppressors comes as gun owners await Bondi’s review of 2nd Amendment issues stemming from Trump’s Executive Order, where he asked her to review previous EOs, rules, guidances, plans, and other government actions.
What do you think of the DOJ’s statement that the Second Amendment doesn’t cover suppressors? Let us know in the comments below.
3 replies on “Breaking: DOJ Says Suppressors Not Covered by the 2nd Amendment”
What’s new, no politician wants to touch anything to do with reversing NFA rules or gun control laws let alone obolish the ATF. Now there’s a DOGE cut. The last time I remember the Feds doing anything was allowing the 90’s magazine ban expire. Give an inch and they’ll take a thousand miles.
why are they required to use a suppressor in many countries in Europe for hunters to protect everyone’s hearing and they aren’t here in the US? Maybe Kennedy needs to help with the stamp removal!
It’s beyond ridiculous to attack the one accessory that should be on as many firearms as possible.