Acting Alaska Attorney General Cori Mills is urging Alaska’s next Legislature to correct inconsistencies between state and federal firearms laws following a federal court decision concerning the registration requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs) and short-barreled shotguns (SBSs).

In Silencer Shop Foundation v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a federal court ruled that certain federal registration requirements for these firearms and accessories were unconstitutional and could not be enforced against the plaintiffs, including the State of Alaska.

While Second Amendment rights advocates welcomed the decision, it created uncertainty in Alaska because state law links certain criminal-code defenses to federal registration requirements.

Until legislators fix the discrepancies, Alaska’s Department of Law has asked law enforcement agencies to consult with state prosecutors before filing charges under the affected statute.

“The Second Amendment, and the right to bear arms, must be protected,” said Acting Alaska Attorney General Cori Mills. “The court made the right decision, and we appreciate the court recognizing federal overreach into our Second Amendment rights. While a win for the Second Amendment, the court case and the ATF’s guidance add a level of confusion for many Alaskans who want access to these firearms but don’t see the legal way forward in ownership under existing law.”

In the meantime, our department is asking law enforcement to work closely with state prosecutors before filing any charges as the state of the law is in flux.

Mills said the proper place for this to be resolved is in the State Legislature.

“In the meantime, our department is asking law enforcement to work closely with state prosecutors before filing any charges as the state of the law is in flux,” she said.

On Aug. 5, a United States District Court ruled that certain registration and regulatory requirements of the National Firearms Act (NFA) could not be enforced against the plaintiffs in that case. The NFA, enacted in 1934, established federal requirements for certain firearms, like short-barreled shotguns and rifles, as well as certain accessories, like suppressors. Historically, individuals seeking to purchase or transfer these items were required to pay a $200 federal tax stamp, apply for ownership to the ATF, and register the item in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.

Congress subsequently eliminated the $200, making and transfer taxes for these items through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, effective January 1, 2026, while leaving the associated registration and approval requirements in place. Alaska joined 14 other states, six businesses and associations, a non-profit, and one individual gun owner to sue the federal government, challenging those remaining requirements and arguing that Congress no longer had the authority to enforce the regulatory requirements when it eliminated the tax.

The district court agreed with the plaintiffs, and the U.S. Department of Justice chose not to appeal the decision. Although the court’s ruling applied only to the plaintiffs, ATF subsequently announced that it would no longer enforce the affected approval and registration requirements nationwide. ATF also clarified that it would continue accepting voluntary registrations, recognizing that several states, including Alaska, have laws that reference federal registration requirements.

Under existing state law, possession of certain prohibited weapons remains a criminal offense. However, the statute provides an affirmative defense for individuals who have complied with applicable federal registration requirements. The Federal government’s decision to discontinue enforcement of those requirements, while continuing to accept voluntary registrations, creates uncertainty about how Alaska’s criminal statute should operate going forward. 

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.