Trump Blocks NFA Appeal — Illinois Gun Owners Take Note

President Trump just shut down the DOJ's attempt to appeal Judge James Hendrix's ruling in Jenson v. ATF — the Texas federal court decision that declared the National Firearms Act unconstitutional as applied to suppressors, short-barrel rifles, and other NFA-regulated items. The administration ordered its own Justice Department to stand down. No appeal. The ruling stays.

That is not a small thing. And for Illinois gun owners already living under PICA's rifle and magazine ban, it's worth slowing down and thinking through what this actually signals.

What Judge Hendrix ruled — and why the administration walked away

Judge Hendrix's decision in Jenson v. ATF applied the Bruen historical-tradition test directly to the NFA and found it lacking. The government could not produce founding-era historical analogues that justified the NFA's registration, taxation, and transfer restrictions on common firearms and accessories. The ruling was issued on two independent grounds, meaning even if one legal theory had a weakness, the other still stood.

The previous administration would have appealed that instantly. Instead, Trump's DOJ reviewed the ruling and declined to challenge it. An Office of Legal Counsel opinion accompanied the decision, signaling this wasn't just a tactical choice — it reflects the administration's legal position on Second Amendment scope under Bruen.

That's the same Bruen framework our case — Bevis v. City of Naperville — has always relied on. And it's the same framework the Seventh Circuit majority largely sidestepped when it upheld PICA in its 2-1 ruling last month.

The through-line to Illinois and PICA

Here is where it connects directly to what Illinois gun owners are living through right now.

The Seventh Circuit's majority opinion upholding PICA treated semiautomatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines as categorically outside robust Second Amendment protection. The dissent — and the Supreme Court's own recent signals — push back hard on that approach. The Bruen test demands that the government find genuine historical tradition justifying a ban, not just assert that a weapon is dangerous or that legislatures have broad power to regulate.

When the Trump administration looks at a federal court ruling invalidating NFA restrictions and says "we agree — don't appeal it," that's the executive branch of the federal government endorsing the same analytical framework that should, by any consistent reading, gut PICA too.

The DOJ that filed an amicus brief on my side in Bevis v. Naperville, and sent Harmeet Dhillon to argue it at the Seventh Circuit, is the same DOJ that just declined to defend the NFA against a Bruen-based challenge. The administration's position is coherent — and it's ours.

Illinois' attorney general will not reach the same conclusion on her own. She'll keep defending PICA until a court forces her hand. But the federal executive and the plaintiffs in our case are now aligned on the constitutional question in a way that would have been unthinkable three years ago.

What this does — and doesn't — change for Illinois right now

Let me be straight with you: dropping an NFA appeal in Texas does not lift PICA. Illinois gun owners still cannot legally possess the magazines and rifles the ban covers unless they registered under the affidavit deadline — and even that registration puts them in a legal gray zone that is anything but settled.

What this development does is accelerate the political and legal pressure on the Seventh Circuit's PICA ruling before it reaches the Supreme Court. Every time the federal executive branch takes an action consistent with the Bruen framework — whether it's the NFA appeal decision, the Virginia DOJ lawsuit, or the amicus brief in our case — it builds the record that gun bans like PICA are legally indefensible under the current constitutional standard.

I've covered the full arc of this litigation on the blog, including the Seventh Circuit's July 2026 ruling and the Supreme Court's acceptance of the AR-15 ban question. All of those threads lead to the same place: a final reckoning at SCOTUS, where the Bruen test will be applied to bans like PICA on the merits, with the federal government now on the side of gun owners rather than the states.

Where things stand as of mid-July 2026

• The Jenson v. ATF NFA ruling stands — no appeal filed by the Trump DOJ.
• Bevis v. City of Naperville is positioned for Supreme Court review following the Seventh Circuit's 2-1 PICA ruling.
• The Trump DOJ remains on record via amicus brief opposing PICA's constitutionality — an alignment that still holds.
• PICA remains in effect in Illinois. Gun owners here are still subject to the ban and registration requirements while litigation continues.
• The Supreme Court has agreed to take up the core AR-15 question — the ruling that shapes PICA's fate is coming.

If you have questions about what you can legally own, transfer, or purchase while all of this plays out, our store staff can walk you through the current legal landscape. We won't give you legal advice — that's what attorneys are for — but we know this terrain better than most, and we're not going to leave you guessing.

There's a veteran who comes into the shop periodically and every time we talk, he shakes his head at the magazine-capacity limits. He served with rifles that held more rounds than Illinois now allows civilians to use for home defense. He's not angry about it in a performative way — he's just quietly baffled that this is where we landed. These developments — the NFA ruling, the DOJ's posture, the Supreme Court's direction — are for people like him. He followed every rule. He deserves a legal framework that actually respects that.

Law Weapons has been at this for 30 years. We're not stopping now.

— Robert Bevis, Law Weapons & Supply