Blog

Federal Judge Rules Congress Forfeited Power to Regulate Silencers, Short-Barrel Firearms by Cutting Taxes to $0

Broad swaths of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) are now unconstitutional, a federal judge in Texas has ruled.

On Wednesday, US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix noted portions of the NFA no longer collect tax revenue as a result of cuts in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). He concluded that meant those portions of the federal law could no longer be justified as a lawful exercise of Congress’s taxing authority. Therefore, he ruled, the registration requirements and other regulations on items like silencers and short-barrel rifles that are ostensibly justified as part of the tax collection process are now void.

“Because today’s NFA does not generate any revenue from untaxed firearms, its regulatory provisions cannot be upheld under the taxing power,” Judge Hendrix wrote in Silencer Shop v. ATF. “And there is no sign in the NFA’s text, structure, or statutory history that Congress invoked any other power in crafting the NFA provisions at issue. Thus, the regulatory provisions must be enjoined as unconstitutional because they exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”

While the ruling only applies to named plaintiffs in the case, those plaintiffs include members of most of the nation’s largest gun-rights groups–including Gun Owners of America, the Firearms Policy Coalition Action Foundation, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, and several others. The ruling, which Judge Hendrix stayed for a week to allow time for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to appeal his decision, could make acquiring the affected NFA items much easier for the average American if it goes into effect. Even if DOJ appeals the decision, which seems likely given its earlier defense of the law, the early win provides some momentum for gun-rights activists–who experts have argued face a tough climb.

On January 1, 2026, silencers, short-barrel rifles and shotguns, as well as firearms in the NFA’s “any other weapon” category, became subject to a paradoxical $0 tax–down from the $200 tax imposed when the NFA was first adopted. Still, anyone looking to buy those items needs to prove they paid the $0 tax by handing over their fingerprints and pictures to register each device with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). That was the key sticking point for the plaintiffs in Silencer Shop v. ATF, who believe Congress cutting the tax also undercut the NFA’s registration justification.

Shortly after President Donald Trump signed the OBBA, which passed Congress along party lines through the reconciliation process, gun-rights activists filed suit against the NFA. While they had successfully lobbied Republicans to cut the tax and even try to eliminate the registration process, they weren’t able to get the registration repeal through the complex legislative process. Still, they argued the tax cut alone was enough to render the remainder of the NFA unconstitutional.

“[T]he NFA no longer imposes any tax on the vast majority of firearms it purports to regulate,” their initial complaint stated. “The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Congress and the President enacted on July 4, 2025, zeroes the manufacture and transfer tax on nearly all NFA-regulated firearms. That means the constitutional foundation on which the NFA rested has dissolved.”

In response, the DOJ argued the relevant portions of the law did still collect some tax revenue from manufacturers and dealers. It also said the NFA was a constitutional exercise of several other Congressional powers.

“The NFA, including as it was recently amended in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (‘OBBB’), falls within Congress’s constitutional authority under Congress’s taxing power, the Commerce Clause, and the Necessary and Proper Clause,” the DOJ’s brief read. “Plaintiffs’ contrary arguments contravene binding Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit decisions, so they cannot carry the day in this Court.”

Judge Hendrix ultimately sided with the plaintiffs. He concluded the NFA was an exercise of Congress’s taxing power, but didn’t serve that role anymore in the wake of the tax cuts.

“As passed, the NFA required individuals to pay a tax before transferring or making a covered firearm,” Judge Hendrix, a Donald Trump appointee, wrote. “And it included burdensome regulatory provisions to aid the collection and enforcement of those taxes. At that time, the NFA possessed the key feature of any tax: It produced some revenue for the government. But that is no longer true.”

He noted that the plaintiffs also challenged the law on Second Amendment grounds, but that he didn’t feel compelled to decide those claims.

“With the NFA’s taxes now eliminated, each set of plaintiffs alleges that the NFA’s regulatory provisions for untaxed firearms exceed Congress’s Article I enumerated powers,” Judge Hendrix wrote. “They also claim that those same NFA provisions infringe the Second Amendment right to ‘keep and bear Arms.’ The Court agrees on the first point and need not reach the second.”

Additionally, he rejected the DOJ’s attempts to justify its continued enforcement of the NFA registration requirements on the untaxed items in question by pointing to other Congressional powers it believes could cover the law. He argued those powers were not on Congress’s mind when the law was enacted and can’t be fallen back on at this point.

“By zeroing out the transfer and making taxes for most NFA firearms, Congress eliminated the constitutional basis for the regulations that formerly supported the taxes for those firearms. No longer can the challenged NFA provisions be justified—as they have been for nearly 90 years—under Congress’s taxing power,” Judge Hendrix wrote. “And because Congress enacted the challenged NFA provisions under the Taxing Clause only, the NFA cannot be retroactively justified under another power that Congress never invoked, such as its authority to regulate interstate commerce. Thus, the challenged NFA provisions exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”

The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment on the ruling or questions about whether it planned to appeal. Judge Hendrix’s stay provides the Department with up to a week to decide.

Keep reading

Counterterrorism Expert Tells Senate Hearing Michigan Dem Senate Nominee Abdul El-Sayed Has Deep Ties to Muslim Brotherhood Network and Terror-Linked Groups Through Father-in-Law and Emgage

A top counterterrorism expert delivered a bombshell warning Wednesday during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on the Muslim Brotherhood’s network operating “hidden in plain sight” in America: Michigan Democrat Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed’s candidacy raises serious national security concerns because of his family and organizational connections to Brotherhood-linked groups and figures with terror ties.

Kyle Shideler, Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy, testified under questioning that El-Sayed’s rise should alarm Americans.

Just one day after El-Sayed narrowly clinched the Democrat primary over establishment favorite Rep. Haley Stevens, Shideler laid out the web of associations.

Keep reading

Colombian Authorities Seize Bus Carrying 420 Kilograms of Explosives Bound for Cali Days Before Presidential Inauguration

Colombian security forces have reportedly intercepted a bus carrying approximately 420 kilograms of ammonium nitrate explosives in the department of Cauca, preventing what authorities believe could have been a major planned large-scale terrorist attack against military and police installations in Cali.

The operation, dubbed Operation Prometeo, was carried out today along the Pan-American Highway near Santander de Quilichao by Colombia’s National Police, with the participation of the Intelligence Directorate (DIPOL), Criminal Investigation Directorate (DIJIN), Anti-Narcotics Directorate (DIRAN), Highway Police (DITRA), and the Southwest Organized Crime Task Force.

Authorities say intelligence indicates the explosives were intended to strike military and police facilities in Cali during the inauguration of President-elect Abelardo de la Espriella on August 7, with the objective of demonstrating the group’s operational capability and disrupting one of Colombia’s most significant political events.

Keep reading

Dog-Abusing, Trump-Hating Rep. Shri Thanedar LOSES His Primary to Radical Socialist as Democrat Establishment Gets Humiliated in Michigan

Democratic Socialists/Communists have scored another massive win in Michigan, and this one is actually quite satisfying.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Islamo-Marxist Abdul El-Sayed narrowly defeated the faux moderate Democrat Haley Stevens in the Michigan Democratic Primary for Senator. Stevens was backed by Michigan Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Senator Chuck Schumer.

El-Sayed will now face former Rep. Mike Rogers, who ran unopposed in the GOP primary, in the November general election.

Polling showed that El-Sayed would cruise to a massive landslide win, but he will only end up winning by less than one percentage point.

Now, another establishment Democrat, Rep. Shri Thanedar, has just lost his primary to Donavan McKinney, a 34-year-old Democratic socialist state rep.

Like El-Sayed, McKinney was backed by several big-name socialists across America, including Bernie Sanders.

From NBC:

Rep. Shri Thanedar has lost his Democratic primary in Michigan to state Rep. Donavan McKinney, NBC News projects, in a victory for the party’s progressive wing.

The 34-year-old McKinney won the backing of a number of prominent progressives across the state and country and secured the latest victory for the faction mounting an intraparty insurgency against the Democratic establishment.

McKinney, a 34-year-old state lawmaker and democratic socialist, is running on a progressive platform including “Medicare for All” and putting new restrictions on military aid to Israel, while pushing massive investments in sectors like clean energy and housing.

Despite McKinney’s obviously dangerous politics, this is a victory all should celebrate.

First, Thanedar’s own policies are not that different from the far left. He was even aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America before reportedly being expelled by a local chapter in 2023.

Thanedar has also become a sad joke in Democrat circles with his pathetic attempts to impeach President Trump and endless humiliating TV appearances.

But there is a quite sinister side to Thanedar as well: several years ago, this monster allegedly tested drugs on innocent beagles and left them to die.

Thanedar formally owned a pharmaceutical testing lab facility in New Jersey called AniClin Preclinical Services before it was shuttered in 2010. Several reports confirm that 118 lab-tested beagles were rescued from the facility along with dozens of monkeys.

The animals were left behind in horrific conditions.

Here is how USA Today described the scene before the heroic rescue:

Day after day, month after month, year after year, they were confined to plexiglass crates, fed and watered on precise schedules, kept clean. But with no opportunity to leave their solitary little boxes and spend time with others like themselves, with nothing but the most antiseptic contact with humans and no time outside the gleaming, climate-controlled facility, the 118 beagles — lab dogs used to test drugs and chemicals—displayed nothing of the much-acclaimed breed characteristics: joyful, noisy, and curious.

But that’s not all: USDA inspection reports from 2009 showed multiple previous federal violations by Thanedar’s company. Even worse, Thanedar’s legal team also sought to sell the innocent animals to recover corporate debt.

Thanedar got a much-delayed version of karma from a political standpoint. It’s just too bad he won’t be seeing the inside of a cell.

Keep reading

Sanofi Made False Claims About RSV Shot for Infants, FDA Says

In a letter to the drugmaker, the FDA said the agency approved Beyfortus, an RSV monoclonal antibody, as a defense against RSV lower respiratory tract disease — but that Sanofi has been claiming it protects broadly against RSV disease, which occurs in the lower and upper tracts. Beyfortus has come under scrutiny following reports of at least two infant deaths during clinical trials for the drug.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is accusing Sanofi of making false or misleading promotional claims about Beyfortus, a preventative treatment for RSV, Fierce Pharma reported.

In a letter to the drugmaker, the FDA said it approved Beyfortus specifically as a defense against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) lower respiratory tract disease — but that Sanofi has been claiming it protects broadly against RSV disease, which occurs in the lower and upper tracts.

The company has sent providers emails urging them to give the shot to “help prevent RSV disease in infants.”

The promotional materials included other similar statements, including, “Beyfortus is a monoclonal antibody that helps prevent RSV disease starting from Day 1 after injection,” and “Your efforts in immunizing infants against RSV disease can impact the population health burden in your community.”

The FDA said that language creates the “misleading impression” that the drug prevents RSV disease generally.

FDA asks Sanofi to take immediate action to stop misbranding RSV shot

Beyfortus, a monoclonal antibody manufactured by Sanofi and AstraZeneca, was approved by the FDA in 2023. Unlike a vaccine, monoclonal antibodies provide passive immunity by delivering laboratory-produced antibodies designed to protect infants against severe RSV disease.

The FDA emphasized that Beyfortus is specifically approved for the prevention of RSV lower respiratory tract disease — not RSV infection or upper respiratory tract illness generally.

The agency noted that while the promotional emails later referred to protecting infants from “RSV-LRTI,” lower respiratory tract infection,  that clarification did not adequately correct the overall impression created by the broader claims appearing earlier in the communications.

“By failing to adequately communicate the indication for Beyfortus, the emails create a misleading impression about the drug’s FDA-approved indication,” the letter states.

The agency concluded that the promotional materials “misbrand Beyfortus” under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).

The FDA requested that Sanofi take immediate action to stop disseminating the promotional communications or other materials containing similar representations.

The agency also instructed the company to submit a written response within 15 working days detailing all Beyfortus promotional communications containing comparable claims, along with its plan to discontinue or correct them.

If Sanofi believes its promotional materials do not violate federal law, FDA said the company may provide its reasoning and supporting evidence as part of its response.

Keep reading

Moderna Has Found Another Virus to Monetize

Moderna is back at the public trough with another experimental mRNA vaccine, this time targeting the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola. CBC reports that Health Canada has authorized a Phase 1 trial of mRNA-1469 at three Canadian sites involving about 80 adults. Canada has never recorded a single Ebola case, and its government admits the risk to the general population is low, yet healthy Canadians will supply the human data for a product intended primarily for a third-world African nation.

As of August 1, there were 3,748 confirmed cases and 1,657 deaths in the Democratic Republic of Congo. There is no approved vaccine specifically targeting Bundibugyo Ebola, but Moderna is not financing this humanitarian venture alone. The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations has pledged up to $50 million for preclinical research, Phase 1 testing, and manufacturing doses before the early trial is even complete.

This is public risk and private reward dressed up as charity. If the product fails, outside funding absorbs much of the loss. If it succeeds, Moderna gains another proprietary vaccine and governments or international organizations will purchase the doses. Moderna promises to make at least 500,000 doses available to poorer countries at “access pricing,” but it has not told the public what that price will be, or who will ultimately pay the bill.

COVID was perhaps the most profitable virus in pharmaceutical history. Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech were once projected to generate between $93.2 billion and $124 billion in combined vaccine sales during 2022. Taxpayers helped finance development, governments guaranteed purchases, mandates manufactured customers, and Big Tech silenced those who questioned the arrangement. The corporations kept the profits while politicians treated the population like an obedient herd.

Keep reading

If You Want to Live, Stop Trusting the FDA, CDC, Corporate Media, and Jab-Pushing Doctors

If You Want to Live, You Have to Think For Yourself

I recently posted a flippant comment about not trusting the judgment of people who took the COVID jabs. The backlash was immediate and furious, and it only confirmed what I’ve known for years: too many people have outsourced their thinking to authorities who lie to them for a living.

The anger proves my point. When you confront people with evidence that their trusted institutions deceived them, they don’t want to hear it. They’d rather defend the authority that misled them than admit they were used as guinea pigs in a mass medical experiment. That’s not stubbornness; it’s deep psychological conditioning.

I make one exception: the active-duty military personnel who were physically coerced into taking the shots. The United States Coast Guard members who filed a class-action lawsuit against the Biden administration over its COVID-19 vaccine mandate were victims of medical assault, not naive volunteers. [1] Their “choice” was discharge, career destruction, and public humiliation. I have nothing but respect for the people who fought back.

The ‘I Trusted My Doctor’ Excuse Is Not a Defense

The most common justification I heard from angry commenters was some variation of “I trusted my doctor, the FDA, the CDC, the media, Fauci.” And that is exactly the problem. Your doctor was not the one who authorized an experimental gene therapy with zero long-term safety data. Your doctor was just the final delivery mechanism for a system that had already abandoned real science.

The Biden administration pressured the FDA to “change its procedures, cut corners, and lower agency standards” to approve Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines, according to a congressional report. [2] Emergency use authorization was never meant to bypass the entire clinical trial process, yet that is precisely what happened. Experts said that properly analyzing millions of pages of individual participant data would have required at least six months, so they skipped it entirely. [3]

Pfizer’s own whistleblower, Brook Jackson, testified that trial data were falsified, patients were unblinded, poorly trained personnel administered injections, and follow-up on reported side effects was significantly delayed. [4] Anyone with internet access could have found all of this information in real time from independent voices. Ignorance was a choice, and for too many people, it was a fatal one.

Keep reading

Establishment Democrats Wasted $63.9 Million Trying to Take Down Abdul El-Sayed

Establishment Democrats in Washington spent over $60 million in support of Rep. Haley Stevens’ bid for the Michigan U.S. Senate nomination. It wasn’t enough.

The messy primary pitting their pick, Stevens, against progressives Abdul El-Sayed and Mallory McMorrow (before she abandoned her bid) saw a record amount of outside spending. AdImpact, which tracks campaign advertising, called the 2026 race the most expensive on the Democrat side in history. 

“Stevens (MI-11) has seen a majority of ad support targeting the primary, at $63.9M. In total, 78% of all spending targeting the primary went towards supporting Haley Stevens. Her opponent, El-Sayed has seen $7.5M in ad support. Prior to dropping out, McMorrow saw $9.0M,” said the company in a summary of the race. 

The pro-Israel organization AIPAC spent the most of any group, backing Stevens with more than $30 million in spending over the past year. That funding came via United Democracy Project, doubling the amount it spent to defeat former Democrat Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York in 2024. 

Stevens’ bid was heavily supported by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). 

The New York Times wrote in June that Schumer asked party donors to support Stevens, calling her the “strongest candidate” in private conversations and spawned efforts giving her a sizeable edge from big-spending Democrats. 

Keep reading

Zelensky Pushing For WWIII

The September Duma Elections – Will Putin Face Pressure to Escalate or Moderate?

One of the greatest mistakes analysts make is assuming that international events are driven solely by the decisions of a single leader. They personalize history, reducing complex geopolitical developments to one individual. Netanyahu did that assassinating the Ayatollah assuming instant victory. The world is far more complicated. Political leaders are often reacting to internal pressures that are invisible to outside observers.

The upcoming State Duma elections deserve attention not because they are likely to determine who governs Russia immediately, but because they may reveal how much political room President Vladimir Putin has to maneuver as the war and the broader confrontation with the West continue.

The Western Miscalculation

Since 2022, much of the Western narrative has assumed that economic sanctions would rapidly undermine Putin’s domestic support and eventually force either a change in policy or a change in leadership. This is the standard Neocon playbook which has NEVER worked even once. But they simply feel better punishing someone they hate. That Neocon forecast has repeatedly underestimated Russia’s ability to adapt economically while overestimating the willingness of the Russian political establishment to fragment during an external confrontation. Their sanctions against Iran were first imposed in 1979, triggered by the Iran hostage crisis . This initial action has been followed by several significant expansions over the decades, creating a layered and complex sanctions regime  that has not been successful. The U.S. sanctions on Cuba were imposed in a series of steps, beginning in 1960 and culminating in a comprehensive embargo in February 1962. They are still in place 66 years later proving sanctions make Neocons feel good and powerful but fail to topple governments or achieve goals.

History teaches that sanctions do not produce the political outcome intended by those imposing them. More often they strengthen nationalist sentiment by allowing governments to portray outside pressure as an attack on the nation rather than on the ruling administration. This often strengthens the government they seek to overthrow.

Elections in every country, even where the outcome is largely expected, serve as an important measure of elite cohesion and public confidence. This is often why those in power seek to rig elections to retain power.

There are signs that Ukraine’s deep strikes inside Russia are creating pressure and dilemmas for the Kremlin. However, there is no direct evidence that this has led to explicit calls from Russian hawks for tactical nuclear weapons just yet. Replace Putin, and this can become nuclear faster than anyone realizes. Nuking Kiev would probably save the world not unlike the US did to Japan. It would be a demonstration to the EU that they better think twice about trying to destroy Russia.

Keep reading

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Florida’s Ban on Exposing Children to ‘Lewd’ Drag Shows

A federal appeals court has upheld Florida’s child protection law that seeks to prevent kids from attending or being exposed to “adult live performances” like suggestive drag shows or lewd “drag queen” story hours.

The case has been in litigation for three years after a federal judge blocked the law after Orlando’s Hamburger Mary’s Restaurant and Bar sued to preserve it’s ability to host “family friendly drag shows,” according to Courthouse News Service and other outlets.

The 2023 Protection of Children Act law defines an “adult” performance as any show that depicts or simulates “nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or specific sexual activities, lewd conduct or the lewd exposure of prosthetic or imitation genitals or breasts,” the legal news service reported.

Drag shows are known to feature performers dressed in over-the-top sexualized costumes who perform suggestive dances and sometimes simulate lewd acts.

On Tuesday, the full 11th Circuit bench decided on the appeal, ruling 8-5 in favor of overturning the lower court ruling made by Clinton-appointed Senior District Judge Gregory Presnell 2023, as well as overturning an earlier three-judge panel in the circuit last year that agreed with the lower court’s ruling.

“We will not second-guess the Florida Legislature’s decision to regulate obscenity,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Andrew Brasher on behalf of the majority. “Preventing children from attending adult live performances obscene for them is rationally related to Florida’s interest in safeguarding the well-being of minors.”

Brasher was appointed to the appellate bench by President Donald Trump.

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier praised the decision.

“Huge victory for our team at the 11th Circuit! After 3 years of litigation, the full court affirmed the constitutionality of Florida’s ban on children attending sexualized drag show,” he said in a statement. “Great work by Solicitor General Dave Dewhirst, who argued the case on the state’s behalf!”

Keep reading