A federal appeals court determined on Friday that New Jersey’s prohibitions on assault firearms and magazines exceeding 10 rounds are unconstitutional. This marks the first instance of a federal appeals court invalidating a state ban on such weapons. The ruling coincides with the U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming consideration of whether semiautomatic rifle bans infringe on the Second Amendment. Notably, a different federal appeals court recently upheld Illinois’ ban on semiautomatic weapons.
The appeal court’s decision in the New Jersey case extends beyond a July 2024 verdict from a federal judge. That earlier decision found the state’s AR-15 ban unconstitutional while maintaining the restriction on larger magazines. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stated in its opinion that the prohibitions on semiautomatic rifles classified as “assault firearms” and on “large capacity ammunition magazines” violate the Constitution.
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport expressed disappointment in the ruling, labeling it both “unfortunate” and “legally incorrect.” She noted, “Every other federal circuit court to consider the issue has come out the other way.” Davenport argued that assault weapons and large magazines contribute significantly to mass shootings, asserting that New Jersey acted within reason and law to restrict them. She added, “We are considering our options.”
John Commerford, the executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, characterized the ruling as a “historic victory for the NRA, the Second Amendment, and law-abiding Americans.” The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence reports that, besides New Jersey, ten states and the District of Columbia generally ban the manufacture, sale, and transfer of assault weapons. Further, these regions, including New Jersey, limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds for various firearms.
Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, remarked that the ruling was unexpected, given the history of federal appeals courts upholding similar bans. He suggested the decision “may be foretelling the Supreme Court’s coming opinion on assault weapons bans.” Winkler observed that few gun laws seem secure from nullification at present.