Rush v. United States: The Case That Could Reshape the National Firearms Act

The Seventh Circuit’s recent decision in Rush v. United States didn’t make huge headlines, but it should have — because this case could be the one that forces the Supreme Court to take a hard look at the National Firearms Act (NFA) and the 1937 Sonzinsky v. United States precedent that has propped it up for nearly nine decades.

Case Background

In August 2022, Jamond Rush was charged with possessing an unregistered short‑barreled AR‑15 rifle in violation of the NFA. Rush moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the NFA’s restrictions were unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, especially in light of the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision, which emphasized a “text and history” test for evaluating gun laws.

The district court rejected Rush’s motion, holding that regulating unregistered short‑barreled rifles (SBRs) is constitutional. Rush entered a conditional guilty plea and appealed.

Seventh Circuit Decision

The Seventh Circuit upheld Rush’s conviction, leaning heavily on United States v. Miller (1939), which upheld a similar regulation. The court said SBRs are not “in common use” by law‑abiding citizens for lawful purposes like self‑defense, and therefore fall outside the Second Amendment’s protections as interpreted in Heller.

But that’s exactly where things could get interesting at the Supreme Court.

Why SCOTUS Might Take This Case

The NRA has filed a petition for certiorari, and reports suggest SCOTUS has requested additional briefing — a sign they may be interested. If they take Rush, it won’t just be about SBRs. It could become a referendum on the legal foundation of the entire NFA.

Enter Sonzinsky v. United States

In Sonzinsky (1937), the Supreme Court upheld the NFA’s $200 tax on certain firearms as a valid use of Congress’s taxing power. They didn’t touch the Second Amendment — the case was purely about whether Congress could impose a tax that had a regulatory effect.

Here’s the problem:

• In 2025, H.R. 1 (“One Big Beautiful Bill”) eliminated the $200 NFA tax on SBRs, suppressors, short‑barreled shotguns, and AOWs.
• With the tax now zeroed out, the NFA is no longer generating revenue — its original constitutional justification under Sonzinsky is gone.

That’s like removing the foundation from under a house and expecting it to stand.

A Growing Wave of NFA Challenges

Rush isn’t the only game in town. In the months since H.R. 1 eliminated the $200 tax stamp, at least two new federal lawsuits have been filed directly challenging the NFA’s constitutional foundation. Both argue that with the tax now set to zero, the NFA can no longer be justified under Congress’s taxing power as in Sonzinsky.

These cases are still in their early stages, but their existence strengthens Rush’s chances at SCOTUS. The Court often prefers to resolve high‑stakes constitutional questions before multiple circuit courts issue conflicting rulings. If they take Rush now, their decision could settle the “zero‑tax” issue for all pending NFA challenges in one stroke.

Possible SCOTUS Outcomes in Rush

Possible Ruling	Description	Estimated Likelihood
Affirm NFA SBR Restrictions	Upholds the regulations, keeps Sonzinsky intact, says SBRs aren’t protected under 2A.	15%
Strike SBR Restrictions, Leave Sonzinsky Intact	Declares SBRs protected arms but avoids touching Sonzinsky directly.	45%
Strike SBR Restrictions, Gut Sonzinsky	Rules SBRs are protected and says NFA’s tax‑based authority no longer applies without revenue.	35%
Overturn Sonzinsky Entirely	Declares taxing‑power justification invalid for any protected arms, opening door to challenges on suppressors, SBSs, and machine guns.	5%

The Machine Gun Domino

Over 740,000 machine guns are legally registered in the U.S., and thousands more exist illegally (like Glock switches). If you count all of them, the “in common use” threshold looks a lot more favorable to gun owners.

Anti‑gun advocates argue machine guns are “dangerous and unusual,” but that’s a judicial invention — the Second Amendment doesn’t say “shall not be infringed, except for arms deemed dangerous and unusual.” Historically, that phrase referred to misuse in public, not banning entire classes of weapons.

If Sonzinsky falls, the NFA’s tax-based restrictions on machine guns would have no constitutional footing. That wouldn’t automatically repeal the Hughes Amendment’s ban on post‑1986 civilian machine guns, but it would set the stage for that fight.

What to Watch For if SCOTUS Takes Rush

1. Which test dominates the questions:
   • If the Justices focus on Bruen’s text and history standard, that’s good news for Rush.
   • If they keep circling back to “common use” or “dangerous and unusual,” expect a narrower ruling.
2. Who asks the first pointed questions:
   • Thomas, Alito, or Gorsuch coming out swinging on Second Amendment history could signal a broad ruling.
   • Roberts or Kavanaugh steering toward “narrow grounds” would point to a more limited outcome.
3. How much attention Sonzinsky gets:
   • Heavy questioning about the taxing power in light of H.R. 1’s zeroed‑out tax could mean they’re considering gutting or overturning it.
4. Any signals on machine guns or suppressors:
   • Even offhand comments could indicate whether they’re willing to extend the logic beyond SBRs in future cases.

Key SCOTUS Timeline Points

• Fall 2025 (Sept–Oct) – If they take it up during the “long conference,” the announcement would likely be late September or early October.
• Winter 2025–26 (Jan–Feb) – If briefing runs longer, they could grant cert mid‑term.
• Spring 2026 (March–April) – Oral arguments, if granted this term.
• June 2026 – Decision issued at the end of the term.

Two Scenarios:

• Fast Track: Grant in fall 2025 → Argument early 2026 → Decision June 2026.
• Delayed: Hold until after a brace case → Argument in 2026–27 term → Decision June 2027.

Parallel Cases That Could Influence SCOTUS Timing

1. ATF Pistol Brace Rule Cases – Already in the Fifth and Sixth Circuits; could address SBR classification without hitting Sonzinsky.
2. Suppressor Regulation Challenges – Ongoing in Fifth/Eighth Circuits; could be follow‑up cases if Rush limits NFA power.
3. Machine Gun & Hughes Amendment Challenges – Likely to follow if Sonzinsky is overturned.
4. Other NFA Tax Authority Lawsuits – At least two already filed; Rush could resolve them all if taken now.

Prediction with Parallel Cases in Mind

• 70% chance SCOTUS takes Rush this term (decision by June 2026) — momentum from H.R. 1 and fresh Second Amendment challenges.
• 30% chance they hold Rush until after deciding a brace case.

Final Thoughts

The odds of SCOTUS taking Rush are better than average, especially with the tax stamp’s elimination under H.R. 1 shifting the legal ground. Whether they go so far as to overturn Sonzinsky is less certain — but even a narrow win for Rush could gut the NFA’s power over SBRs and invite the next wave of challenges.

This case might start with one man’s unregistered short‑barreled AR‑15, but it could end with a legal earthquake that reshapes federal gun regulation for decades to come.