PHILADELPHIA, PA – A federal appeals court dealt a major blow to New Jersey’s gun control laws on Friday, ruling that the state’s ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles, including AR-15-style firearms, and magazines holding more than 10 rounds violates the Second Amendment.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit decided that sweeping restrictions on all semi-automatic rifles violate the Second Amendment. The Court also struck down the state’s controversial 10-round magazine limit.
Friday’s en banc ruling sends the case back to the district court for additional proceedings involving other firearms covered by the challenged law.
The Circuit Court relied heavily on two decisions – District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen – and concluded that semi-automatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines both qualify as “arms” and, accordingly, are protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The court found that the record demonstrated these firearms are commonly owned by Americans for lawful purposes, including self-defense, recreational target shooting, hunting, and pest control. Because of that widespread lawful use, the court said New Jersey failed to identify a historical tradition of firearm regulation that would justify banning an entire class of protected arms.
Judges rejected the state’s historical comparisons to colonial-era gunpowder storage regulations and 19th-century restrictions on Bowie knives, finding those laws too different in purpose and too distant from the nation’s founding to support the modern prohibitions.
The decision is one of the most significant Second Amendment victories in the Third Circuit since the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision reshaped how courts evaluate firearm regulations.
The ruling was not unanimous. Several judges filed concurring and dissenting opinions, with dissenters arguing the majority placed too much emphasis on the popularity of AR-15-style rifles and large-capacity magazines while overlooking what they described as their uniquely dangerous characteristics and historical tradition of regulating especially hazardous weapons.
Unless stayed, the decision could significantly reshape New Jersey’s firearms laws and is likely to prompt further appeals.
242415p
