The Trump administration is signaling it could shift its positions on several pending Second Amendment cases, including one asking the courts whether ownership of suppressors should be protected by the Constitution.

Attorney General Bondi’s chief of staff says the Department of Justice will re-evaluate recent litigation on the topic of firearms rights and has already asked for a pause in the case involving suppressors.

Chad Mizelle posted on X Monday morning that, “Protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens is a high priority” for Ms. Bondi. Mr. Mizelle said the department would look at its position on silencers or suppressors, which reduce the noise and recoil a gun makes when fired.

The DOJ’s pause in position on suppressors comes in connection with U.S. v. Peterson, a case involving a man who sold weapons through a business that operated out of his home. George Peterson was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for illegal firearm transactions.

A magistrate judge issued a warrant to search Mr. Peterson’s home and business. During the search, agents found a single unregistered firearm suppressor in a safe in Mr. Peterson’s bedroom. Mr. Peterson was indicted and entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving the right to appeal on claims he had a constitutional right to own the suppressor.

The Fifth Circuit reviewed the case and held that suppressors are accessories and not arms protected by the Second Amendment.

The case was set for a review, at which point Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Simpson, a Biden administration holdover, filed a government brief agreeing with the court’s decision. The following day,  however, the Justice Department asked for a 30-day stay in the case so it could review and potentially change its position on the matter.

The American Suppressor Association says it is strongly in favor of the review.

“We are very excited about that,” General Counsel Michael Williams said. “They laid out there very specifically in that filing that the U.S. Attorney’s office is hoping to reconsider its decision to assert that suppressors are not covered by the Second Amendment.”

“This could also signal a major shift in suppressor restrictions nationwide based on what position the DOJ and ATF take on these items and also what position they take in this lawsuit,” a lawyer who runs the Armed Scholar YouTube channel, Anthony Miranda, stated in a video he posted over the weekend.

President Trump addressed the NRA last spring promising a rollback of gun-control policies if he returned to the White House. In February, the president issued Executive Order 14206, directing the attorney general to examine all executive actions to present a proposed plan to protect Second Amendment rights and re-evaluate its litigation positions.

The executive director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law, Andrew Willinger, says a challenge to restrictions on gun sales to individuals under the age of 21 is another case that could be impacted by the DOJ’s review.

“We could see a change in position and things like, you know, challenges to the pistol brace rule, that categorize pistol braces as short barrel rifles that are subject to heightened regulation under the National Firearms Act,” Mr. Willinger says.