New Jersey's ban on high-capacity magazines and certain rifle designs faces legal defeat after the Third Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the state's restrictions on Second Amendment grounds.
The ruling strikes down two separate New Jersey laws: a prohibition on magazines holding more than 10 rounds and restrictions on rifles classified as "assault weapons." The Third Circuit found both statutes violated the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established that firearm regulations must align with the nation's historical tradition of gun ownership.
This decision represents a setback for Democratic Governor Phil Murphy's administration, which championed the restrictions as public safety measures aimed at reducing mass shooting casualties. New Jersey enacted the magazine ban in 2018 and the rifle restrictions in 2019, positioning itself among the strictest states on gun regulations alongside California and New York.
The Third Circuit's reasoning centered on the Bruen framework, which requires courts to assess whether historical gun regulations support modern restrictions. The panel concluded that New Jersey failed to demonstrate sufficient historical precedent for limiting magazine capacity or banning specific firearm types. The opinion suggests that general firearm ownership receives strong constitutional protection.
The decision aligns with a broader pattern of federal court rulings since Bruen, which have invalidated similar magazine restrictions in other states and struck down concealed carry licensing requirements nationwide. Gun rights advocates view these outcomes as long-overdue recognition of Second Amendment protections. State prosecutors and gun control supporters argue the rulings prioritize gun access over public safety.
New Jersey may pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court, though certiorari remains uncertain. The state faces pressure from its significant gun control constituency while confronting consistent judicial skepticism toward magazine capacity limits specifically. Other states with comparable restrictions now confront similar legal vulnerabilities, potentially resetting the landscape of permissible gun regulations across the country.