Gun Rights Take Center Stage at DOJ: A Windfall for Firearms Makers?

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Trump administration has embarked on a radical reorientation of its priorities, elevating Second Amendment protections to a core mission of its Civil Rights Division. This shift, announced in 2025, signals a dramatic departure from the division’s traditional focus on racial justice, voting rights, and police accountability, instead framing gun rights as a civil rights issue. The implications for the firearms industry—already booming due to heightened demand—could be profound, but the policy’s long-term risks to public safety and regulatory backlash also loom large.

Policy Shifts Favoring Gun Rights

The DOJ’s new agenda begins with a bold reinterpretation of civil rights law. In March 2025, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon declared that the Civil Rights Division would now scrutinize state and local gun control measures as potential violations of constitutional rights. This pivot has already led to high-profile decisions, such as the restoration of gun privileges to Mel Gibson, a celebrity with a 2011 domestic violence conviction. While controversial, such cases underscore the administration’s willingness to override bureaucratic safeguards.

The practical effect? A centralization of power in Washington to expedite decisions on reinstating gun rights for prohibited individuals. The DOJ revoked the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives’ (ATF) authority to review such cases, concentrating power in the Office of Legal Counsel. This move benefits firearms manufacturers, as it removes a key regulatory hurdle to expanding the pool of eligible gun owners.

Weakening Enforcement Against Rogue Dealers

The DOJ’s pro-gun stance extends to dismantling enforcement mechanisms targeting unscrupulous gun sellers. In April 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi repealed the Biden-era “Enhanced Regulatory Enforcement Policy,” which required the ATF to revoke licenses of dealers who flouted federal laws. This policy had led to 195 license revocations in fiscal year 2024—2% of inspected dealers—despite evidence that just 5% of dealers account for 90% of crime guns.

The rollback of enforcement is a clear win for the firearms industry. Gun lobby groups such as the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Gun Owners of America (GOA) have long argued that such regulations stifle commerce. However, critics, including the GIFFORDS organization, warn that this creates a free-for-all for traffickers and straw purchasers, potentially flooding communities with untraceable firearms.

Structural Changes Undermine ATF’s Independence

The DOJ’s reallocation of ATF resources further tilts the scales toward industry interests. A January 2025 directive diverted 150 ATF agents to support mass deportations at the U.S.-Mexico border, stripping the agency of capacity to trace crime guns or investigate trafficking networks. Internal turmoil at the ATF—marked by leadership vacancies and the controversial appointment of FBI Director Kash Patel as acting director—has deepened concerns about institutional stability.

Proposals to merge the ATF with the DEA or transfer its agents to the FBI threaten its ability to enforce gun laws independently. For investors, this raises questions: Can the ATF effectively monitor an industry it is now being asked to subsidize?

Market Implications: A Short-Term Boost, Long-Term Risks

The DOJ’s actions create a near-term tailwind for firearms manufacturers. Companies like Sturm, Ruger (STKR), Smith & Wesson (SWK), and Remington Outdoor (REM) could benefit from expanded demand as regulatory barriers fall. The removal of restrictions on “stabilizing braces” for firearms and challenges to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act also reduce compliance costs for these firms.

However, risks abound. Public safety advocates warn of rising violence: studies show domestic abusers with access to guns are five times more likely to kill their partners. If crime rates spike, political pressure to reverse course could intensify, especially in Democratic-led states. Additionally, the DOJ’s politicization of the Civil Rights Division—using it to serve industry interests—risks backlash from a public increasingly polarized on gun policy.

Conclusion: A Firearm-Friendly Policy with Blazing Risks

The DOJ’s 2025 pivot toward gun rights presents a clear opportunity for firearms companies. Regulatory rollbacks, weakened enforcement, and the prioritization of Second Amendment advocacy could boost sales and margins in the short term. For example, STKR’s stock has surged 28% year-to-date as investor optimism in the sector grows.

But the calculus is fraught. The 5% of dealers responsible for 90% of crime guns (per ATF data) pose a systemic risk. If crime spikes, public outrage could trigger a backlash, leading to new regulations or lawsuits. Meanwhile, the DOJ’s reliance on political appointees to override bureaucratic safeguards—exemplified by the Mel Gibson case—erodes institutional credibility.

Investors should weigh the near-term gains against the potential for reputational damage and regulatory pushback. The firearms industry may see a windfall, but the flames of controversy could burn brighter than the profits.

Data sources: DOJ reports, ATF enforcement statistics, GIFFORDS studies, and stock performance metrics.