Rep. Mike Rulli’s bill to tighten the Equal Access to Justice Act hits the bullseye on a long-standing loophole that lets deep-pocketed nonprofits treat taxpayer-funded litigation like an all-you-can-sue buffet. Safari Club International rightly flags how groups with seven-figure endowments have weaponized EAJA to file serial lawsuits against federal agencies, racking up attorney fees that ordinary citizens ultimately foot. By capping hourly rates and annual recoveries for 501(c)(3)s, the legislation would force these organizations to weigh the real cost of their legal campaigns instead of shifting the burden to the public.

For the Second Amendment community the stakes are especially high. Anti-gun foundations have repeatedly used EAJA to challenge everything from interstate handgun sales to ATF brace rules, knowing that even if they lose they can still extract six-figure payouts from the government. Those payouts subsidize the next round of litigation, creating a self-perpetuating cycle that chills regulatory reform and drains agency resources that could otherwise go toward actual enforcement priorities. Rulli’s reforms would blunt that advantage, making it harder for well-heeled opponents to litigate the right to keep and bear arms into practical extinction.

If enacted, the measure would restore a measure of fiscal accountability without touching the core purpose of EAJA—helping small businesses and individuals who truly lack resources. It also sends a clear signal that Congress is finally willing to examine how litigation funding distorts policy outcomes in areas far beyond hunting and firearms, from land-use rules to environmental permitting. For pro-2A advocates who have watched lawsuit after lawsuit funded on the public dime, this is a welcome first step toward evening the legal playing field.