In a major development for gun owners and constitutionalists, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit just withdrew a deeply flawed ruling that claimed suppressors aren’t “arms” protected by the Second Amendment. This move, announced June 17, 2025, signals a serious rethink by the judges who originally made that call—and it’s a huge win for anyone who understands that our rights don’t come with built-in sound restrictions.
BACKGROUND: What’s This Case All About?
The case is called United States v. Peterson. It started when John Peterson, a licensed firearms dealer in Texas, was investigated for allegedly selling guns without proper documentation and possessing an unregistered suppressor (or silencer) in his home. The suppressor didn’t have a serial number or tax stamp under the National Firearms Act (NFA), which means it wasn’t registered.
Peterson pleaded guilty, but he challenged the law itself—arguing that suppressors should be protected under the Second Amendment. In February, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit ruled against him.
They said suppressors weren’t “arms” and therefore not covered by the Constitution.
That ruling sparked outrage across the pro-gun community—and rightly so. It directly contradicted the Supreme Court’s guidance in Bruen, which made it clear that all instruments that facilitate armed self-defense count as “arms.” The idea that a device designed to make firearms safer and easier to use isn’t protected defies common sense.
What Changed?
Here’s where it gets interesting. The same Fifth Circuit panel that made the bad ruling just withdrew it. No explanation. No rehearing “en banc” (meaning by the full court). They simply pulled it—like it never happened. Their webpage goes to a page not found error!?
Legal experts, including constitutional attorney and Second Amendment defender Mark Smith (host of the Four Boxes Diner), believe this is a clear sign that the panel knows they got it wrong. Now they’ll likely rewrite the opinion from scratch—hopefully with the Constitution in mind this time.
Why Suppressors Matter
Suppressors are not some Hollywood hitman gadget. They’re basically mufflers for firearms—originally invented by the same guy who invented car mufflers. They help reduce noise by 20–30 decibels, which protects hearing and makes it easier to shoot safely and responsibly.
The Department of Justice under President Trump even filed a legal brief in support of suppressors, saying they help shooters avoid permanent hearing loss and improve communication in self-defense situations. The U.S. Marine Corps began issuing them in 2020 because of their tactical benefits—including less recoil, better accuracy, and reduced muzzle flash.
It’s not just about comfort—it’s about responsible use of arms, especially in home-defense scenarios where ear protection might not be an option.
Why This Ruling Was Dangerous
The original Fifth Circuit decision was dangerous because it would have allowed the government to strip constitutional protection from anything it labels an “accessory”—even if that item is essential to safe and effective firearm use. That logic could easily be extended to magazines, optics, or other components. It opened the door to death by a thousand cuts for Second Amendment rights.
Worse, it failed to apply the Supreme Court’s test from Bruen, which demands that modern arms—and things that help with armed self-defense—be judged by historical tradition, not government preference.
What Happens Next?
Now that the bad ruling is gone, the Fifth Circuit panel will likely reissue a new decision. The hope is they’ll get it right this time and recognize suppressors as protected arms. If they don’t, this case may end up before the Supreme Court—and it could be the next major showdown on the scope of the Second Amendment.
Either way, this withdrawal is a win. It shows that when patriots speak up and push back, even federal judges listen.
Final Thoughts
Suppressors aren’t some fringe issue—they’re about protecting your hearing, your family, and your right to defend yourself. With over 4.5 million legally owned suppressors in circulation and more in demand, it’s time the courts got real and treated them like what they are: tools of responsible gun ownership.
Stay tuned, stay sharp, and stay in the fight. Because this win isn’t the end—it’s a step forward in the long war to fully restore our Second Amendment rights.
Live Inventory Price Checker
|
Rugged Suppressor Obsidian 9 Black 9mm | Bereli | $ 643.00 |
|
|
Rugged OBS0009 Obsidian 9 9mm Suppressor | Shooters Choice | $ 629.99 |
|
|
|
Rugged Suppressors 3 Lug Mount for Obsidian 45/9 9mm Firearms | Ammunition Depot | $ 90.49 |
|
|
|
Custom Fit for Obsidian 45/9 - Rugged Suppressor Fixed Barrel Mount 9/16"-24 tpi in Black - OF006 | Palmetto State Armory | $ 78.99 $ 57.99 |
|
U.S. Demorat Representative Suggests TRIPLING ($600) Suppressor Tax!
A Big LOSS for Mexico, U.S. Gun Control Banners at the Supreme Court
.
This move, announced June 17, 2025 is the same old crap we have been putting up with for years. End the ATF.
The Constitution does not say dangerous, or unusual, or suppressor, or hearing loss, or serial number, or tax stamp, or documentation, or bla bla bla. We are being played. If you play their game and they make the rules, expect to lose. We need to play our game. That is the simple wording of the Constitution.
HLB
In order to be subjected to the unconstitutional NFA, an arm must be “dangerous AND unusual”. 4.5 millions cans are not at all unusual but in common use (exceeding 200k per Caetano). So they must be removed from NFA regardless of congress or FBATFE or courts. Same with SBR’s and machine guns. The fifth also ruled NFA unconstitutional for machine guns as the Hughes amendment prevents the gov from collecting the tax, and the point of the bill is to produce revenue via taxes.
I keep hearing claims they are working on or supporting 2nd amendment rights, yet somehow they SHORT act will only eliminate an unconstitutional tax IF you buy your can from the right people.
These bums got in office because they said they would fix things, I am optimistic, but also realistic. They want to to keep ALL of the current problems to run on for the next election- and the ones after that.
I called my Senators demanding they introduce impeachment for these three clowns for issuing a ruling that wasn’t even internally consistent. Doubt that had anything to do with it though.
Not only are suppressors protected under the 2Amendment according to Bruen, that instruments that facilitate arms self-defense count as “arms,” but Congress has already said that suppressors are firearms so far as the law is concerned in the NFA since 1934 – here it is – NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT OF 1934 48 STAT. 1236 To provide for the taxation of manufacturers, importers, and dealers in certain [Public, No. 474.] firearms and machine guns, to tax the sale or other disposal of such weapons, and to restrict importation and regulate interstate transportation thereof. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives… Read more »