41 Members Of Congress Demand DOJ Halt Gun Control Defense In Fiery Letter
41 Members Of Congress Demand DOJ Halt Gun Control Defense In Fiery Letter
Submitted by 
,
Gun owners' number one fighter in Washington, D.C., Representative Andrew Clyde, along with five senators and 35 other House members, have sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi.
In this letter, they've made it clear that the DOJ is out of line with Congress' intent.
đ¨BREAKINGđ¨
â Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) 
Specifically, they cite the Justice Department's recent defense of the National Firearms Act in the Gun Owners of America case that we're affectionately calling the "One Big Beautiful Lawsuit."
The case itself, Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, centers around the recent removal of the $200 tax from items regulated by the National Firearms Act. Specifically, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, AOWs (short for "any other weapons," a catch-all term for items that don't fit neatly into the other categories of regulation), and silencers.
Previously, purchasing one of these highly regulated items would require a $200 tax payment, a background check including fingerprints and passport photos, and a lengthy wait.
But thanks to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed by President Trump in July, that $200 tax payment was removed from those aforementioned items.
Unfortunately, the registration requirements of the National Firearms Act remain. That's why we at Gun Owners of America are suing ATF and the Department of Justice to remove the registration requirements on these items.
The National Firearms Act and its registry, the NFRTR or National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, have been declared a legitimate use of Congress' article 1 power of taxation.
Keyword: "Taxation."
The NFA registry is a registry of tax payments, and those tax payments are associated with firearms. This is a sneaky way to get around calling it a gun registry, instead - it's a tax registry.
But what do you do when the tax has been decreased to zero dollars?
Well, the Department of Justice wants to keep the registration requirements in place, along with the penalties for noncompliance.
That's like if the IRS abolished the income tax but demanded that you still complete your W2 or 1099 tax forms every year, otherwise face prison time and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.
To make matters worse, the DOJ used common anti-gun talking points to justify their defense of this unconstitutional registration scheme.
Here are some of the highlights:
DOJ Referred to NFA regulated firearms as "Weapons of War" a meaningless gun control lobby term meant to strike fear into the minds of those uneducated on firearms policy. The reality is, any weapon is a "weapon of war," and the Second Amendment was specifically written to protect those same types of weapons!
DOJ stated that NFA items were "especially susceptible to criminal misuse," a line taken straight from Biden-era Justice Department briefs meant to justify bans of certain firearms.
Finally, DOJ is claiming that because other parts of the NFA still generate revenue, the entire act along with the registration requirements for untaxed items is constitutional.
Rep. Clyde and 40 other members of Congress disagree. In fact, here's what they had to say:
The registration requirements under the NFA are, in fact, inseparably linked to its taxation provisions. Registration serves as the mechanism by which the ATF accounts for the tax paid on each firearm, identified by its serial number.
The tax stamp affixed by the ATF to an NFA transfer and registration application reflects both the firearmâs serial number and the amount of tax paid for the transfer.
Moreover, the NFAâs criminal provisions pertain exclusively to the failure to pay or register the payment of this tax with the ATF. Any reinterpretation of the NFA that allows registration to persist once taxation has been removed contradicts the statuteâs text, its structure, and Supreme Court precedent.
Following the OBBBAâs elimination of the tax on a broad class of firearms regulated under the NFA, the constitutional foundation for applying the NFAâs transfer and registration requirements to those $0-tax firearms no longer exists.
These requirements now operate without any corresponding exercise of Congressâs taxing power. As the Supreme Court upheld the NFAâs provisions only as âin aidâ of that power, and since the relevant excise taxes have been repealed, the transfer and registration requirements should likewise be understood as repealed with respect to firearms now subject to a $0 tax.
The Departmentâs recent filing ignores this reality and instead offers a theory that would convert the NFA from a tax statute into a free-standing federal gun registry â an outcome Congress has never authorized and has repeatedly rejected.
In our lawsuit, we establish that thanks to two Supreme Court cases from the 1930s, US v. Sonzinsky & US v. Constantine, the Supreme Court has said that the NFA is an exercise of Congress' taxing power, and in addition, a tax that generates no revenue is therefore not a tax at all.
Rep. Clyde also states this plainly in his letter, saying:
As you are well aware, Congress enacted the National Firearms Act in 1934, imposing an excise tax of $200 â equivalent to nearly $5,000 today â on the manufacture and transfer of certain firearms. The NFA also established burdensome registration requirements for gun owners seeking to transfer NFA-regulated firearms...
Congress enacted the NFA pursuant to its taxing power under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, in Sonzinsky v. United States, held that the NFAâs registration provisions were âsupportable as in aidâ of Congressâs proper exercise of the taxing power. Furthermore, the Supreme Court in United States v. Constantine held that a tax that doesnât generate revenue cannot be justified as a tax.
The National Firearms Act's legal foundation is that it's an outgrowth of Congress' taxing power. But when that tax is removed, does the federal government still get to maintain a registry?
The answer is obviously no.
We want to work with the Department of Justice to abolish unconstitutional gun control, not fight them tooth and nail as they defend it. At any time, they can decide if they want to be on the side of the Second Amendment.
Maybe this letter from Congress will help the DOJ see that!
Sat, 12/20/2025 - 19:50
X (formerly Twitter)
Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) on X
The only No Compromise Second Amendment lobby in Washington.
Take Action below ⤾ď¸
X (formerly Twitter)
Rep. Andrew Clyde (@Rep_Clyde) on X
U.S. Representative for Georgiaâs Ninth Congressional District | Navy Combat Veteran | FFL | Small Business Owner | @HouseAppropsGOP & @HouseBudg...
X (formerly Twitter)
Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) on X
đ¨BREAKINGđ¨
@Rep_Clyde just led 5 Senators and 36 House Representatives in condemning @AGPamBondi's mishandling of GOA's Big Beautiful Lawsui...
Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge
Zero Hedge
41 Members Of Congress Demand DOJ Halt Gun Control Defense In Fiery Letter | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Starlink was not mentioned, but it is important to note that Tesla pays for cellular network access to provide basic connectivity supporting essential functions such as navigation and software updates. Users then pay a monthly fee for "Premium Connectivity" to unlock features like live traffic visualization, satellite maps, and streaming media over cellular networks.
We have already seen some Tesla drivers purchase suction cup mounts for Starlink Mini dishes and attach them to the glass moonroof. The purpose is to provide a high-speed connection to the vehicle and its occupants, especially in areas with low coverage or dead zones.
Here's EV blog Electrek's first take on the new patent:
I think itâll be about cost. Right now if you have premium connectivity, Tesla pays whatever cellular network for that. If they can bring it totally in "house" then that means Musk pays himself for internet and not AT&T or some other carrier. It might not be much cost savings but every penny counts for those reoccurring fees on the bottom line.
Furthermore, Starlink registered "
Strategy executive chairman Michael Saylor, whose company has been buying Bitcoin aggressively for nearly five years since adopting a Bitcoin (BTC) treasury strategy, presented what many described as plans for a âBitcoin central bankâ during his keynote speech at Bitcoin MENA.
Economist Saifedean Ammous, well-known in Bitcoin circles for penning The Bitcoin Standard, was also a notable figure attending the conference in Abu Dhabi.
Ammous and Saylor are understood to converse regularly, with Saylor having written the foreword of Ammousâ most famous book.
Speaking on Cointelegraphâs Chain Reaction show, Ammous acknowledged that Saylor does not view Bitcoin as money through the same lens as other Bitcoin proponents.Â
Source:Â 
Brent crude markets slipped underneath $60/bbl last week, ending the week at $60.57, as traders appear numb to Trump's gunboat diplomacy in the Caribbean.
We're surprised Beijing hasn't lashed out at the U.S. for such actions in the Caribbean, given that this disrupts oil trade flows from West to East. Perhaps a deal was made at the Trump-Xi meeting in the fall.
At a news conference earlier this week, Pillen 
However, the plan does not specify where two million Palestinians would be sheltered during the reconstruction period. Israel's 
The first tranche of DOJ files released Friday include thousands of pages of material on Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, 
While no major bombshells have surfaced yet, former President Bill Clinton is facing renewed scrutiny because of some of the photos in the latest release: him posing with Epstein in matching shirts, chatting up a dancer, and lounging on what appears to be a plane with a redacted woman on his lap. Clinton also appears at a dinner table with Mick Jagger, Epstein, and Maxwell.
One standout image captures Clinton in a pool or hot tub with an unidentified woman whose face the DOJ blacked out, indicating that the individual is a victim and/or underage, which was allowed by the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The Wall Street Journal reports that a U.S. military official said Friday that dozens of targets were being struck by U.S. F-15 and A-10 warplanes, Apache attack helicopters and Himars rockets.
The operation is being dubbed âHawkeye Strikeâ in honor of the Iowa National Guard soldiers who were killed and wounded in an ambush the Trump administration has blamed on ISIS.
The gunman that ambushed the Americans was killed in the attack.
But President Trump on Sunday vowed to take military action against the group.
âThere will be a lot of damage done to the people that did it. They got the person, the individual person, but there will be big damage done,â Trump said at the time.
Syrian authorities last week blamed the ambush on a member of Syriaâs security forces who they said was set to be fired for holding extremist views.
*Â *Â *
Syria is celebrating after President Trump 
Sanctions have been on Syria going all the way back to the 1970s, with more piled on over the decades, especially after 2011, and then the most far-reaching, the Caesar sanctions, took effect in 2019 at a time that Assad was winning the war.
Coupled with the sanctions was a long-running CIA and Gulf-spearheaded proxy war, which flooded jihadist groups with weapons and cash - all for the sake of eventually installing a more pliant client ruler.
Now, one year after Washington accomplished its regime change, and with Bashar al-Assad in Moscow, has Washington chosen to remove the sanctions.
As Beirut-based 
Shellenberger pointed out that Muskâs fine came while European governments are demanding backdoor access to all private text messages (under the pretense of combatting the transmission of child pornography) and creating a so-called âDemocracy Shieldâ of government-funded âfact-checkersâ that enables âcensorship by proxy.â  He also noted that the European Commission announced the fine to coincide with the rollout of the Trump administrationâs new 
Blaise Metreweli, who recently became head of the Secret Intelligence Serviceâcommonly known as MI6âsaid that Russiaâs campaign against Ukraine and its wider hybrid operations pose an acute and enduring danger to Britain and its allies, according to a 
