The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled 10-5 that New Jersey’s restrictions on semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than 10 rounds violate the Second Amendment.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit struck down New Jersey’s ban on semi-automatic rifles and its prohibition on magazines holding more than 10 rounds Friday, delivering a major victory to gun-rights advocates challenging the state’s firearms restrictions.
In a 10-5 en banc ruling, the court held that New Jersey’s so-called assault-firearm provisions could not survive the constitutional standard established by the Supreme Court in its 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
The court also invalidated the state’s restrictions on magazines classified under New Jersey law as “large-capacity magazines.”
The 192-page opinion concluded that the Second Amendment protects the broader class of semi-automatic rifles covered by the state’s ban, not only the Colt AR-15 model addressed in an earlier district court ruling.
“Applying the framework announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), we agree with the District Court that New Jersey’s ban on Colt AR-15s violates the Second Amendment,” the majority wrote.
“However, because the record supports the same result for all semi-automatic rifles—not only Colt AR-15s—we will MODIFY the District Court’s order so that it deems the Assault Firearm Provisions unconstitutional with respect to the full class of semi-automatic rifles.”
The court said it would affirm the lower court’s decision after expanding its scope.
“We will AFFIRM that part of the order as modified,” the majority wrote. “The LCM Provisions also violate the Second Amendment, so we will REVERSE the District Court’s order with respect to those.”
Because the court found the magazine restrictions unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, it declined to rule on a separate challenge brought under the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause.
“Because the LCM Provisions violate the Second Amendment, we need not address the Takings Clause challenge,” the opinion stated.
U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan ruled in 2024 that New Jersey’s ban on the Colt AR-15 violated the Second Amendment because the firearm is commonly possessed by law-abiding Americans for lawful purposes and therefore protected under the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and Bruen.
Sheridan’s ruling did not invalidate the broader semi-automatic rifle ban and left the state’s 10-round magazine restriction in place.
Friday’s Third Circuit decision went substantially further, extending constitutional protection to the full category of semi-automatic rifles covered by the challenged provisions and striking down the magazine limit.
New Jersey’s Assault Firearm Provisions were enacted in 1990 following a mass shooting in California.
The law prohibited possession of a list of named semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, as well as firearms the state considered “substantially identical” to those listed.
The restrictions included the popular AR-15 platform and imposed criminal penalties for unlawful possession.
Although the law contained a licensing process, critics argued that the requirements made approval effectively unattainable for ordinary law-abiding residents. According to the information presented in the case, no civilian had successfully obtained such a license.
New Jersey expanded its firearm restrictions in 2018 when Democratic lawmakers lowered the state’s magazine-capacity limit from 15 rounds to 10.
The change required residents possessing magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds to surrender them, modify them to comply with the lower limit or transfer them outside the state. Failure to comply exposed owners to criminal penalties.
The Third Circuit evaluated the restrictions under the legal framework set by Bruen, which requires governments defending a firearm regulation to demonstrate that the law is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.
The Supreme Court rejected the use of interest-balancing tests that weigh a law’s public-safety objectives against the burden imposed on constitutional rights.
Under Bruen, courts must first consider whether the Second Amendment’s plain text covers the conduct being regulated. If it does, the government must identify sufficiently similar historical regulations demonstrating that the modern restriction fits within the nation’s established legal tradition.
The Third Circuit majority determined that New Jersey failed to provide an adequate historical basis for prohibiting the covered semi-automatic rifles and magazines.
The ruling means the state cannot continue enforcing the challenged provisions in their existing form unless the decision is stayed or overturned through further appeal.
New Jersey may ask the Supreme Court to review the case. The state could also seek a temporary stay while pursuing additional legal action.
The 10-5 division among the appellate judges reflects the continuing judicial disagreement over how Bruen applies to modern firearms and accessories that did not exist during the nation’s founding era.
Gun-control advocates argue that states retain authority to restrict firearms they consider unusually dangerous and magazines capable of firing numerous rounds without reloading.
Second Amendment advocates maintain that commonly owned semi-automatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines are protected because millions of Americans possess them for lawful purposes, including home defense, sport shooting and hunting.
Friday’s ruling accepted the challengers’ constitutional position and rejected New Jersey’s attempt to distinguish the AR-15 and other semi-automatic rifles from firearms protected by the Second Amendment.
By extending the lower court’s decision beyond the Colt AR-15, the appeals court invalidated the restrictions as applied to the entire class of semi-automatic rifles covered by the state law.
The ruling also eliminated the 10-round magazine limit, reversing the portion of Sheridan’s decision that had allowed the restriction to remain in force.
The decision marks one of the most consequential federal appellate rulings on semi-automatic rifle and magazine bans since Bruen and could affect similar legal challenges in other states within and beyond the Third Circuit.
Original article
Comments