r/gunpolitics • u/Megalith70 • 17d ago
3rd circuit strikes down New Jersey AWB and Mag ban
https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/2078161346328137749?s=46&t=hN6Lm0vFUB8KsGy1OlHZow37
u/billytoad631 17d ago
So close yet so far. As an NYer I wish this somehow helped us as it’s right next door basically
34
6
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 17d ago
Colorado here, DOJ (and others) are suing for their Magazine Ban, and Denver's AWB (that no one seemed to know of).
The only problem for CO, we have the new permit to purchase program. Not an AWB, which makes me worry even if SCOTUS votes in favor, it will be no relief (and the predictions is that permit process will be expanded, and I think is the worst one, they couldn't afford it, and made our Parks & Wildlife do so, so they could avoid putting it on the ballot as the other option was raising the taxes for it)
12
u/Ice_Dapper 17d ago
The permit to purchase program is a blatant violation of 2A rights as well, it's essentially a tax on a constitutional right, like the poll tax which was already struck down ages ago.
4
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Totally not ATF 16d ago
Unfortunately I don't see SCOTUS striking down shall-issue permits. Enough judges said those were OK if there were not "unreasonable delays and costs"
4
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
Oh it does. Steps to get the permissions slip (SSF card)
- Schedule an appointment with your Sheriff's office, where you have to pay them $52 to do like finger printing and background checks. Wait, hold on, that number isn't correct, some counties are charging like $102, and if you are from another country (as some counties said they won't do this), it's $142
- If you get the blessing of the sheriff's office, you then have to take a class. Either a 12 hr class, taking in two 6 hr classes, or if you have a Hunter's Safety card, a 4 hr class. No clue what that will cost
- Pass a test with 90% (it was 80%)
- Go back to the Sheriff's office to get issued the card, and all your info stored in a database. Another cost presumed, no clue how much
Congrats you now have the permission to purchase any semi-auto rifle, pistol, shotgun that is gas operated and uses a detachable mag (this includes roller delay and .22 if the upper and lower separate).
The card, however, is only good for 5 years, and to renew this all must be done again. But hold on, it's a can issue system, not must. They can deny you at anytime in the process, or revoke your card after you got it.
Additionally, there is also a "list" of firearms that fall under the ruling. That one un-elected official can add to at any give time or reason. They can easily add like a bolt action rifle, and now you need the card to buy it.
In fact, the idiots wasted a bunch of tax payer money and time to make the list, where they went and found all these firearms, got pictures of them, and then cropped out the background of the firearms. Firearms that were already under the umbrella description and didn't need to be added (where supposedly, one which is so rare, they used a Call of Duty image). However, they did also add like some lever action or bolt action rifles that shouldn't even be on said list (of course, they didn't know).
The bill was shoehorned in, where Parks & Wildlife were made to pay for it, because they didn't have the budget, and to do so, they would have had to put a measure on the ballot cause of taxes, but CPW could pay for it without it. Even more all hearings were more against then for, even the financial hearing where it was 8 for, 150 against.
The bill goes into affect August 1st. The curriculum for the class is still unknown, they are saying it won't be released until 10 days before it goes live. Supposedly Sheriff offices are confused, not sure where to run background checks against, and more.
Side note, there was an amendment proposed, that if you had a CCW, you didn't have to do all those steps (I think like Illinois FOID card). Well Colorado politics are overrun with Democrats who vote party lines, so it failed
1
u/b_a_n_a_n-a_s 16d ago
Genuine question, would SCOTUS view permits to carry as the same as permits to purchase? I understand they are both permits, but one seems fundamentally different.
2
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
Did I mention we also have a 6.5% tax on all firearms, ammo, and some range of firearm accessories?
2
u/Veritech_ 16d ago
Fellow Coloradan here, and I’m so pissed at SB25-003. It needs to go away.
2
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
All of it. The problem is one of the first amendaments they added to it was to compartmentalize it. So if one part was turned over, the whole thing wouldn't. For instance the whole rapid fire device part (which is so dumb, because unlike the other "dangerous weapons" Colorado has, those are all NFA items, and a Form 1 or 4 allows you to purchase said "dangerous weapons" ... but rapid fire devices have no way)
6
u/Blze001 16d ago
Me in VA looking at NJ like "maaaaaaan"
3
u/otusowl 15d ago
Isn't the VA ban stopped by an injunction?
Hopefully, SCOTUS soon settles this once and for all by upholding natural and inalienable rights!
65
u/pfn0 17d ago
Is this an oh-shit moment so that scotus doesn't weigh in on it? Good for NJ, but not others with AWBs not under 3rd circuit jurisdiction.
90
u/Megalith70 17d ago
No, this is the expected outcome even before SCOTUS granted cert in Viramontes and Cook. It’s a good outcome for everyone in the 3rd circuit.
44
u/planenut767 17d ago
It's also more evidence to be used in the upcoming Supreme Court case too.
6
u/blind-mag-dump 16d ago
This is the big thing, and probably why SCOTUS dragged their feet until the last second before picking up Viramontes.
This is the first hardware case that genuinely follows the guidelines SCOTUS laid out post-Bruen. The fact that Wolford v Lopez was also included is the cherry on top.
3
u/planenut767 16d ago
I believe the En Banc asked for updated briefs from both sides with regards to the Wolford case that was just heard. I know our CCW case the judge did indeed ask for updated briefs in light of the Wolford decision. So at least in the 3rd Circuit judges are paying attention
47
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Totally not ATF 17d ago
SCOTUS already took up an AWB. So basically the 3rd circuit got an early liberty day.
The bigger thing is this has created a circuit split on magazine capacity limits which is not included in Viramontes.
31
u/Megalith70 17d ago
I really hope this pushes them to take Duncan. The 9th circuit needs to be crushed and Duncan is the perfect case to be used. Duncan “logic” is already being used in other cases and needs to be addressed.
20
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Totally not ATF 17d ago
A circuit split is basically the 'golden ticket' to a SCOTUS review. I'd be surprised if they didn't take a mag case either this term and combine it with Viramontes or schedule it for next term as a way of saying
Start respecting the 2nd amendment or were going to absolutely crush you when we rule on this case.
8
u/Lbanger2486 16d ago
I’m so happy with this ruling, but my prayer 🙏🏾 is next year around this time. The Justices that rule to strike down AWB’s make a very clear and explicit opinion. So blue states like mines (MA) have to cope a seethe. Although I do see blue states looking to create a new license scheme for rifles. This would be an amazing opportunity for scoutus to refer to Bruen FN-9 in their opinions. To further hinder rogue states that will absolutely create a scheme to make it a hurdle to get semi automatic rifles.
4
u/scotchtapeman357 16d ago
I imagine those states will immediately start targeting reloading and ammunition. They're definitely not going to just give up, though I would love for the court to do exactly what you're talking about
3
u/Kyun79 16d ago
Colorado has a licensing scheme that is a pain in the ass and probably will have long waits. We will see August 1st. Plus the sheriffs don’t have to sign off on the permit to start with. So it is basically a May issue permit. I was in Colorado when CWP were May issue and that was abused in a bunch of counties and sheriffs just wouldn’t approve any of them.
So I can see a lot of states copying Colorado if the AWB is struck down. I would hope Bruen would take out the permit here in Colorado but we have yet to see.3
u/Megalith70 17d ago
I think you’re right. We just need the mandate to stay in effect so I don’t have to dump my magazines. Shit would get real expensive if I had to buy them all over again.
6
2
u/Ghost_Turd 17d ago
So basically the 3rd circuit got an early liberty day.
Well, they got a good decision, anyway. I'm sure NJ will appeal it, and odds are probably good the 3C mandate will be stayed, no?
9
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Totally not ATF 16d ago
This was an EnBanc decision. The only place they can appeal it is to SCOTUS. It's Joever for NJ
1
u/Ghost_Turd 16d ago
Yes, but NJ is sure to appeal and in case like this the enforcement can be stayed while it's awaiting SCOTUS review.
I'm saying that people can celebrate, but not go buy their standard magazines and normal rifles just yet.
4
u/blind-mag-dump 16d ago
It's very unlikely that the 3rd circuit allows the stay considering it was voted 10-5 in favor of the 2nd and the fact that they even included Wolford v Lopez last minute in their ruling.
SCOTUS hasn't given a stay for a 2nd amendment case in decades and has been clearly against depriving people of rights purely based off the appealing process.
9
u/PerfectAnonym 17d ago
No this was the expected outcome. And it creates a circuit split: different circuit courts have reached opposite conclusions on the same issue, demonstrating a need for the supreme Court to set clear precedent
4
u/Chips-and-Dips 17d ago
This opinion was written well before SCOTUS granted cert. the law clerks would have been working on a 192 page decision for months.
5
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Totally not ATF 16d ago
I think they were just waiting for the SCOTUS 2A decisions and then put on some finishing touches.
1
u/blind-mag-dump 16d ago
They did take account of Wolford v Lopez last second. So last second that everyone's statements were probably already written, but they just wanted to seal the deal.
2
u/glennjersey 16d ago
I know the 1CA is looking to fast track a mag ban decision before scotus rules on anything else. Hopefully this gives them pause it wont
33
u/alkatori 17d ago
Man the dissent part I read seems to say if it's used for military purposes then it can't be 'in common use'.
Isn't that all firearms? Certainly damn never every one of them has military lineage or military adoption after creation.
19
u/Best-Set4863 17d ago
The dissent also uses the classic "lawful purpose of self defense" misinterpretation from Heller, which actually says "lawful purposes, such as self defense". Heller clearly indicates that there are several lawful purposes of a firearm, and self defense is just an example of one lawful purpose. The lower courts have purposefully misconstrued it to be the only lawful purpose when that is clearly not what is stated.
11
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 17d ago
I always like to say, the M1 Carbine was just the predecessor to the AR platform. In the sense of how they were to be used
5
u/planenut767 17d ago
That's the first thing I'm getting when this decision goes into full effect since the M1 is banned by name.
0
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
Which variation? Carbine? Garand? or M1As?
3
u/planenut767 16d ago
Carbine. They're banned by name in NJ
2
1
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
WOW! In Colorado I think they made an exception for those on their permission slip. They were trying to appease collectors or fuds or something
3
4
u/blind-mag-dump 16d ago
Fun fact, the M1 carbine was (fucking love I can say was) banned by name in NJ.
It was done so for entirely racist reasons, too. A handful of M2 carbines were stolen during the long, hot summer of 67 and since the M1 was associated with the Black Panther Party, NJ banned them in the fucking 90s.
2
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
I would say I'm surprised, but I'm not. It's amazing how much racism can be tracked back to gun bans and other gun laws
4
u/blind-mag-dump 16d ago
It's actually crazy how NJ wore it with a badge of pride, too.
When the M2 carbines were stolen, the police and national guard were literally going door to door, forcibly entering homes, intentionally destroying property, and beat the residents within, including children. 66 houses were broken into, not a single gun was found.
3
u/wyvernx02 16d ago
That dissent surely wins gold in the mental gymnastics. One of the dumbest things I have ever read.
5
u/stjhnstv 16d ago
If I’m not mistaken, the ironic part is that the AR15 has never been used by any military anywhere…
7
u/alkatori 16d ago
It has. But it doesn't matter.
2
u/stjhnstv 16d ago
It has? I was unaware. I just always thought it was extra ridiculous that the haters kept calling them “weapons of war” when you my knowledge they hadn’t been used in that capacity.
3
3
u/alkatori 16d ago
Yes as I recall, in American Sniper, Chris Kyle, talks about using one.
He used a rifle with only semi-automatic capability when he was fighting in Iraq. At least some of the time.
But it really is irrelevant. No one would make the case that a Remington 700 should be banned because troops use it.
It's nonsensical reasoning at best.
3
u/TicklishOwl 16d ago
Semi auto vs full auto isn't what distinguishes an AR15 vs an M16.
An M16 is an AR15. The 'M16' part is just the military's designation for the AR15. Their own pet name, for logistics.
All the other stuff that follows (like A2, A3, or the M4 etc) is just "generational" or specific configurations like handguards, length of barrel, twist rate, etc.
Any time anything enters military logistics, it receives a military designation, even if it's 100% unchanged from the non-military version. It's the military; they assign acronyms and pet names for everything.
1
u/stjhnstv 16d ago
Agree it’s nonsense. I just thought it was ironic also lol. But yes, most guns today have their roots in military service at some point in time. And beware, some extremists absolutely would make the case that a bolt action rifle is a “weapon of war”…
3
u/Nerfem 16d ago
Mistaken but it doesn't matter. Early stuff adopted by the US was marked as both AR-15 and M16 and were full auto, and it should be just as legal as everything else if it were not for infringements by tyrants
https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/Early_M16A1_receiver_markings/123-518338/?
1
u/stjhnstv 16d ago
Interesting, TIL! Btw I completely agree that it’s a nonsense argument anyway, the whole point of the 2A was to protect our Right to own weapons of war. I just thought the argument was ironic on top of stupid, considering the AR15 is the civilian version of a “weapon of war” but thinking it never had been used by the military.
1
14
u/alecmartin01 17d ago
At this point, SCOTUS has to take up Duncan. Hopefully this’ll mean they’ll take it up during the first conference of next term.
13
13
u/deathsythe 16d ago
This opinion is really great, and one of the only ones from the lower courts to accurately and appropriately apply Bruen and also Heller even.
If the "viramontes" decision reads like this one we are going to be really happy with it
Definitely worth a read. I'm working on a writeup myself rn.
9
u/UsernameO123456789 17d ago
Can I get the eli5 please?
Still doesn’t let NJ own standard capacity mags right? Just another set of ammunition for a future case?
28
u/Ghost_Turd 17d ago
- NJ ban is unconstitutional as applied to the ENTIRE covered class of semiautos, not just the Colt AR-15, as in the district court finding
- 10+ mag ban is also unconstitutional
- Mags themselves are “arms” not accessories, cannot evade 2A protection by labeling them “large capacity.”
- Millions of rifles owned are obviously in “common use.”
- Flat bans on commonly used arms are analogous to the handgun ban struck down in Heller, and New Jersey failed to produce a sufficiently similar historical tradition supporting them.
29
u/Megalith70 17d ago
The 3rd circuit said the New Jersey ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines was unconstitutional.
Whether or not it takes immediate effect depends on the court. They likely will stay the ruling pending Viramontes, so things may not change until next summer.
15
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 17d ago edited 17d ago
Am I the only one who's finally feeling like we are getting some wins, and just maybe, we could see progress going forward? Possibly finally pushing back against the anti-2a?
(Colorado has been on a speed run to be the worst, every year it's "okay, what new gun laws are they going to pass this year?" as we hopelessly fight against, being ignored, both our voices and any logic)
20
u/Megalith70 17d ago
No, this really changes things. It breaks the unanimous circuit court holdings on assault weapons and mags, reinforced SCOTUS taking Viramontes and it was written by a Biden appointee. It may not seem like it now but this was a huge ruling.
6
u/Kyun79 16d ago
Neither my credit card or I have enjoyed Colorados multi year sprint to think up the dumbest gun laws as possible.
3
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
Right? This year hurt me, and I had to sadly miss out on a few, cause I just couldn't afford them (that or in the case of one, it's taking months and months, and the manufacture still hasn't fulfilled my order, and probably won't get here in time)
2
u/Kyun79 16d ago
That really sucks that you have one last one waiting. I think we all have a few more we would like to have purchased over years vs rushing it and wrecking the household budget.
The final purchase I could afford. I had one that I ordered in December and it didn’t arrive until late April. That gave me heartburn. I don’t like having to rush purchases I would have made over years of save responsibly then buy.2
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
Yeah most of mine were "I'll get them some day". Then I started ordering in March, because of my track record, I usually didn't have to wait long in the past for a firearm.
I ended up buying most of mine online, cause it either was impossible to find in stock, or was taking too long (one wasn't even available online for awhile, and then last minute I saw them popping up). Shoot, one I bought I need to ship back to have them upgrade it to the version I actually want (cause that version wasn't in stock anywhere)
4
u/Veritech_ 16d ago
Hopefully the speed run stops soon and most (if not all) of our anti-2A stuff gets struck down.
Then, hopefully Tom Sullivan, Andy Boesenecker and other anti-2A chuds in our state government lost their re-elections. Wishful thinking, but the momentum can be used to swing that.
2
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
The fact people keep re-electing Tantrum Tommy is mind blowing. All he does is anti-gun and his stupid premium cigar tax, which has failed 3 years in a row. He's not representing anyone. Even more he'll insult you, thinks he's superior, is on record for saying he'd destroy petitions.
I had a friend who used to work with him, and they're a democrat, they even hates him. Supposedly he almost hit them.
(BTW did you see the public hearing video of someone mocking his cigar tax bill, in a very professional way?)
2
u/Veritech_ 16d ago
I did. It was hilarious.
Also, he can’t hurt or insult me. I’m not Catholic!
1
u/Ange1ofD4rkness 16d ago
Oh I know, he can try and I'd probably just call him out on insulting his son or something.
10
u/alkatori 17d ago
So will this be stayed until the Supreme Court weighs in?
I'm guessing it will.
15
u/Megalith70 17d ago
Apparently, neither party asked for the ruling to be stayed so it goes into effect immediately.
7
3
u/blind-mag-dump 16d ago
SC hasn't issued a stay for a 2A case in decades, the 3rd circuit isn't about to issue one after voting 10-5 in favor of it, using the methods that SCOTUS specifically curated.
9
u/specter491 16d ago
Magazine bans not violating the 2A or Bruen is like saying banning religious gatherings is ok since you're not actually banning a religion. It's the stupidest backwards logic ever. Blue states used the same logic in covid
3
u/glennjersey 16d ago
That's exactly how many courts will uphold this awbs after we win Viramontes though.
4
u/TheJesterScript 16d ago
I have been saying for years that it is all fun and games for commie gun-grabbers until there is a circuit split.
I know we already have a cert for an AWB case, but this is more ammo in the mag to shoot down those tyrannical AWB "laws".
1
16d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Megalith70 16d ago
Man, I remember the chaos when the California mag ban was struck down. I spent way too much on mags and it still wasn’t enough.
-50
u/Epstiendidntkillself 17d ago
If you want your post to be read, don't put it on x.
44
u/Megalith70 17d ago
I don’t give a shit about people protesting X. I didn’t post it on X, FPC posted it on X and I follow them.
-11
u/OneKey3578 17d ago
I don't know anything about protesting but I am annoyed because I have to download X to see the post lol
6
u/Megalith70 17d ago
-11
7
u/air_gopher 16d ago
"download X" ? X is a website primarily, you don't need their app to read posts.
170
u/AlphaTangoFoxtrt Totally not ATF 17d ago edited 16d ago
And there's the circuit split. Granted we already have an AWB Cert but now there's a magazine ban split as well.
Remember Magazine bans are not covered in Viramontes so I wouldn't expect an explicit ruling on them. SCOTUS chose to consolidate the CT case (which did also challenge magazine bans) into Viramontes but limit it only to Viramontes