Plaintiffs in the third SAF-supported National Firearms Act (NFA) lawsuit just dropped a motion for summary judgment, a bold chess move that’s got the Second Amendment world buzzing. Filed out of Bellevue, Washington on April 27, 2026, this comes from the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), those relentless litigators who’ve been chipping away at the NFA’s archaic shackles since the ’30s—think suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and the dreaded $200 tax stamp that’s more punitive relic than rational regulation. Unlike the first two suits that methodically built the case through discovery, this motion skips straight to the endgame, arguing there’s no genuine dispute of material fact: the NFA’s core provisions are unconstitutional under Bruen’s text-history-and-tradition test. SAF’s strategy? Flood the courts with parallel challenges to overwhelm the feds and force a circuit split ripe for SCOTUS pickup.

This isn’t just paperwork—it’s a potential domino toppler for the entire NFA regime. We’ve seen glimmers of success already: lower courts striking down assault weapon bans post-Bruen, and even ATF admissions that pistol braces aren’t machine guns. A summary judgment win here could nullify the suppressor tax overnight, unleashing a market explosion—imagine big-box stores stocking cans like ammunition, prices plummeting from $800+ to sub-$200. For the 2A community, the implications are seismic: it normalizes hearing-safe shooting, boosts manufacturing jobs, and shreds the silencer = assassin myth peddled by gun-grabbers. But expect ATF hysterics and Biden-era delays; this motion forces their hand, exposing how the NFA was always about control, not crime. Gun owners, stay vigilant—donate to SAF, hit the range with what you’ve got, and watch this space. Victory’s in the air, patriots.