A Texas gun club is challenging the constitutionality of a federal ban on possessing machine guns that were not possessed prior to May 19, 1986.
The Temple Gun Club, along with three of its members, filed the lawsuit on May 10 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
TGC argues that Congress exceeded its limited, enumerated powers when it enacted 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), a law that criminalizes possession of machine guns without any connection to interstate commerce or to any other constitutional grant of federal authority.
The plaintiffs, which are represented by the Center for the American Future at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, seek a declaration that § 922(o) is unconstitutional and a permanent injunction preventing its enforcement against TGC and its members.
“Section 922(o) is a perfect example of Congress stretching its commerce powers too far,” said TPPF Attorney Eric Heigis. “Unlike states, Congress has no power to enact a comprehensive criminal code. Congress often justifies new crimes by tying criminal conduct to interstate commerce, but § 922(o) does not even pass that low bar.
“This lawsuit will prove that the framers’ limits on federal power still mean something.”
The plaintiffs include a U.S. Army veteran, a federally licensed gunsmith, and a firearms enthusiast who has been shooting since childhood.
Each Plaintiff legally owns firearms that could be converted into machine guns and wish to acquire or manufacture a post-1986 machine gun. The federal ban prevents them from exercising that right despite their eligibility to possess such firearms under the National Firearms Act.
The lawsuit also asks the court to reconsider the Fifth Circuit’s 1997 decision in United States v. Knutson, which upheld § 922(o) under the Commerce Clause.
Since Knutson was decided, several Fifth Circuit judges have questioned whether federal firearm possession bans comport with constitutional limits on federal power.
Most recently, Judge Don Willett authored a concurrence in United States v. Wilson that called for Knutson to be reconsidered.
Case No. 4:26-cv-00265-O
