Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
The fight over suppressors just took a serious step toward the Supreme Court.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has filed an amicus brief urging the high court to take up George Peterson v. United States, a case that could directly challenge the National Firearms Act’s tax and registration requirements on suppressors.
And if the Court agrees to hear it? This could be a big one.
At the center of the case is a simple argument: suppressors (often mislabeled as “silencers”) are protected arms under the Second Amendment. If that’s true, CCRKBA argues, then taxing and requiring registration for them isn’t just outdated… It’s unconstitutional.
Joining CCRKBA in the brief is a heavy-hitting coalition, including the Second Amendment Foundation, National Rifle Association, American Suppressor Association, and several state-level groups.
In other words, this isn’t a fringe effort. It’s coordinated.
SEE ALSO: This .380 Carry Comp Shoots Shockingly Flat
CCRKBA Executive Director Andrew Gottlieb didn’t hold back, arguing that the case gives the Court a chance to finally end what he described as decades of treating the Second Amendment like a “second-class right.”
And that’s really the core issue here.
The National Firearms Act has regulated suppressors for nearly a century, requiring registration and imposing what was originally a steep tax designed to limit access.
Critics say that framework was never about safety. It was about restriction.
SEE ALSO: Silencer Form 4s Exploded After the Tax Hit $0
Now, with recent Supreme Court decisions reinforcing Second Amendment protections, groups like CCRKBA see an opening to challenge those legacy laws head-on.
The argument goes beyond suppressors. It touches something bigger: Can the government tax a constitutional right?
Because if suppressors are deemed protected arms, that $200 tax stamp and the entire registration system behind it could be on shaky ground.
Of course, none of that happens unless the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case. For now, this is about getting through the door.
But if cert is granted? This could become one of the most important Second Amendment cases in years.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Let’s be serious for a minute, does anyone actually believe the supreme court will grant cert to this case?? Hell no. Just like every other major case dealing with the 2A, they either refused to grant cert or wrote a recommendation and passed it back down to the lower courts who originally ruled incorrectly for them to ignore. That’s why almost nothing ever changes. The odds are 50 million to one the court grants cert. If they do, they will just punt it back down to the lower courts and again, nothing will change.
The Form 4 requirements and NFA restrictions for suppressors, maybe even SBR’s, needs to be twilighted and covered under form 4473. It would save taxpayers a lot of money but yet still be trackable under current firearms registrations handled with the 4473.
If you need to do a background check to exercise a right, then it’s a privilege and not a right.
You can use the correct terminology of ‘suppressor’ in day to day use, but legally speaking, they are referred to and defined as ‘silencers’ in the NFA. Articles discussing law, should use the correct legal terms.
If suppressors are a “firearm” then they ARE protected!