ATF Assistant Director Robert Cekada was among five individuals nominated by President Donald Trump to Senate-confirmable positions who appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee for a confirmation hearing today.
It was somewhat disjointing to hear individual senators ask questions of all five nominees, instead of the committee focusing on one nominee at a time, but regardless, I think Cekada did a pretty good job of addressing the concerns of senators, even when some of the questions posed seemed designed to make a political point rather than elicit a genuine response.
Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, for instance, spent several minutes detailing the federal regulations around suppressors before asking Cekada if there was any genuine policy reason to include suppressors under the National Firearms Act.
Suppressors aren’t firearms.
— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) February 4, 2026
We should change the law and make it easier for Americans to buy them. pic.twitter.com/Yplags9fAx
No argument from me, but the ATF doesn't set policy,. Though it might have been nice to hear Cekada proclaim, "Hell no, I think they should be available over the counter," that's not really within the agency's purview. Suppressors, as he reminded Lee, were specifically regulated in the NFA and Gun Control Act by Congress, but he stated that if Congress decided to remove suppressors from the list of restricted NFA items the agency would be fully supportive of those measures.
Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley further noted that the American Suppressor Association endorsed Cekada's nomination as permanent director, and praised "his unwavering commitment to accountability, transparency, and collaboration with law-abiding firearm owners and industry stakeholders."
That alone probably says more about Cekada than anything he himself said during today's hearing, though the nominee did offer reassurances that the ATF would not be targeting lawful gun owners under his watch.
HUGE to hear from an ATF Director nominee that the agency, under his leadership, would have no intent to "burden lawful gun owners."
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 4, 2026
If confirmed, we will hold Director Nominee Cekada to his promise! https://t.co/UDJoh3WmXy pic.twitter.com/KdJVjixZmD
Cekada also raised some eyebrows when he said that the administration has directed him to hire several thousand new field agents, though that seems like more of an issue with the administration than a knock on Cekada himself.
🚨BREAKING🚨
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 4, 2026
ATF Director nominee Cekada announces that "the administration has directed @ATFHQ" to hire up to 3,000 special agents—an increase of 800 agents.
Where will that money come from? We just cut ATF's budget twice in a row! https://t.co/nLtSIzSraK pic.twitter.com/D2P5zHg1yT
There was one misstep that I heard from Cekada, however, and it too was highlighted by Gun Owners of America.
"We [will] follow President Trump’s Second Amendment executive order to review all ATF policies, procedures, and regulations to ensure that none of those infringe upon the Second Amendment... unnecessarily." https://t.co/Loyr5YbjA7 pic.twitter.com/o4PsVLL3NU
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 4, 2026
I really wish Cekada had just stopped with "none of those infringe upon the Second Amendment," instead of adding "unnecessarily" at the end. The plain text of the Second Amendment doesn't suggest that some infringements might be okay, so long as the government deems them necessary.
I don't think inartful phrasing is grounds for disqualification, though. I've never testified before Congress, but I can imagine it's a nerve-wracking experience, and this was essentially one wrong word, not a pattern of disregarding or diminishing our Second Amendment rights by suggesting no one carries a gun if they're planning on peacefully protesting, or that carrying two magazines is evidence that someone plans on acting violently.
I'm not going to fault Cekada too much for his "unnecessarily" gaffe, especially when he gave a stronger answer to what was essentially the same question posed by Sen. Josh Hawley.
Senator @HawleyMO just asked the ATF Director nominee:
— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 4, 2026
"Can you commit commit that under your leadership, ATF will go at a different different direction than the last administration... as opposed to [targeting] law abiding citizens?"
This was his answer:⤵️ https://t.co/Loyr5YbjA7 pic.twitter.com/J4jSxiqJkO
"We're not here trying to burden, unnecessarily, the American citizen who has the complete right to exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. And we will not be doing that in the future."
I've spoken to multiple members of the firearms industry about how the ATF has been conducting its operations with Cekada essentially running the ship as Assistant Director, and I've heard no negative comments about all about Cekada from the folks in the firearms industry that I've spoken to.
Instead, they've told me that under Cekada's leadership the ATF has dropped its adversarial view of the industry, echoing the words of the American Suppressor Association about Cekada's willingness to collaborate with companies to ensure that ATF's regulations are applied fairly, transparently, and without an end goal of suppressing gun ownership or making it inordinately difficult to conduct business as a firearms-related company.
Cekada's career at ATF may be a detriment to some, especially those who'd like to see the ATF abolished altogether, but if Cekada is truly interested in reforming the ATF it makes sense to have someone who's ben around the agency long enough to identify the problems and to have thought about fixes.
If the agency is going to exist (and it is), then it should be run by a competent professional who doesn't have a bone to pick with the firearms industry or a fundamental disagreement with the right to keep and bear arms. That description jibes with what I've heard from both former employees of the ATF who've worked alongside Cekada to those currently involved in the firearms industry, and I currently see no reason why he shouldn't be confirmed as the ATF's permanent director by the full Senate in the near future.
