A federal appeals court ruled on Friday that New Jersey’s bans on assault weapons and magazines holding more than 10 rounds are unconstitutional. This marks the first instance where a federal appeals court has overturned a state’s prohibition on such firearms. The decision arrives as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to examine if bans on semiautomatic rifles violate the Second Amendment. Only last week, a different federal appeals court upheld Illinois’ restrictions on semiautomatic firearms.
The recent decision in New Jersey surpasses a previous ruling from July 2024 by a federal judge. That judge declared the state’s ban on AR-15 rifles unconstitutional but upheld restrictions on larger magazines. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stated that New Jersey’s prohibition on all semiautomatic rifles labeled as ‘assault firearms’ and the limitation on ‘large capacity ammunition magazines’ were unconstitutional.
New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport, whose office defended the law, expressed disapproval, calling the ruling ‘unfortunate’ and ‘legally incorrect.’ Davenport noted that ‘every other federal circuit court… has come out the other way.’ She emphasized that ‘assault weapons and large capacity magazines contribute to mass shootings’ and affirmed that New Jersey’s actions were ‘reasonable and lawful.’ The state is currently evaluating its options.
John Commerford, executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, celebrated the decision, dubbing it a ‘historic victory for the NRA, the Second Amendment, and law-abiding Americans.’ Besides New Jersey, 10 states and the District of Columbia have laws generally banning the manufacture, sale, and transfer of assault weapons, as stated by the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Additionally, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and 11 other states often limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds.
Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, remarked on the unexpected nature of Friday’s ruling, given past support for assault weapon bans by federal courts of appeals. He suggested that the decision might indicate the Supreme Court’s future stance on assault weapon prohibitions. Winkler observed that ‘very few gun laws’ seem secure from overturning at present.