DOJ files lawsuit: Insists DC’s suppressor ban is unconstitutional
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Thursday, May 14, 2026, the DOJ filed an amended complaint in a U.S. Challenge to D.C.’s Gun Laws, adding a challenge to the categorical suppressor ban and ARs.
D.C. bans suppressors outright, even though they are widely owned and heavily regulated under federal law. Law-abiding Americans must complete an extensive ATF process just to obtain one.
Under Heller and Bruen, the Second Amendment protects arms in common use, and a categorical ban goes beyond regulation; it takes that policy choice off the table. This challenge argues D.C.’s suppressor ban is unconstitutional.
1. Suppressor Bans are Unconstitutional
There has never been a Federal ban on suppressors, but there are currently 8 states, plus the District of Columbia, where their possession is prohibited. Each of these state bans is a violation of the Constitution.
2. The Second Amendment Protects Your Right to Have Suppressors
Suppressors have been classified as firearms since 1934. As such, they are bearable arms and must be afforded the same Constitutional protections by the Second Amendment as firearms.
3. ASA-F Will Fight Until Every Suppressor Ban is Overturned
Suppressors are legal to own in 42 states. California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island are the 8 states that ban suppressors. This DOJ lawsuit challenging the ban in DC, mirrors ASA's efforts in New Jersey and our first of its kind lawsuit in Illinois, Anderson v. Raoul, and it will not be the last!
Case Status
US v. DC
US District Court for the District of Columbia
Case #1:25-cv-04458-APM
Latest Action: 8/5/2026
Action: Court stays case pending Supreme Court's decision in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins
Next: Case stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins; joint status report due within 30 days after the Court issues its opinion
On May 14, 2026, the United States filed an amended complaint challenging the District of Columbia's bans on suppressors and AR-15-style rifles. Defendants moved to dismiss on June 25, 2026, arguing that 34 U.S.C. § 12601 does not authorize a challenge to those substantive criminal prohibitions and that the amended complaint fails to plausibly allege a pattern or practice of conduct depriving persons of constitutional rights. The United States opposed the motion on July 16, 2026, and Defendants replied on August 4, 2026. On August 5, 2026, Judge Amit P. Mehta stayed the case pending the Supreme Court's resolution of Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, which are set for argument on December 2, 2026. The parties must meet and confer and file a joint status report proposing next steps no later than 30 days after the Supreme Court issues its opinion.
ASA-F is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit that was formed to help educate the public on the realities and merits of suppressors.
ASA-F will fight until every suppressor ban is overturned
There are currently 8 states where suppressor ownership and possession are banned.
ASA-F and Silencer Shop have partnered to help sue Illinois
The ASA-F and Silencer Shop backed lawsuit is the first step of many to overturn the unconstitutional bans on suppressors.
ASA-F will back lawsuits in additional states
The lawsuit in Illinois is the first ASA-F backed suit of its kind. It will not be the last. ASA-F will continue until every suppressor ban is overturned!
Winning in court will end the threat of suppressor bans
About the ASA Foundation
The American Suppressor Association Foundation (ASA-F) is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit organization. Formed to educate the public on the realities and merits of suppressors, ASA-F stands at the forefront of pro-suppressor Constitutional litigation.
The ability of the American Suppressor Association Foundation to educate and litigate for your Constitutional rights is tied directly to our ability to fundraise. For more information on how you can help, visit www.Suppressor.org.
