Court Overturns New Jersey’s Ban on Semiautomatic Rifles

A federal appeals court has nullified New Jersey’s prohibition on semiautomatic rifles and magazines exceeding 10 rounds. This decision, announced on Friday, was hailed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) as a significant legal triumph in a case it has pursued since 2018.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia issued a comprehensive ruling declaring that New Jersey’s ban on ‘assault firearms’ and large-capacity magazines infringes upon the Second Amendment. Initially, a lower court had only addressed the AR-15, but the appeal extended the ruling to cover all semiautomatic rifles in general.

This is an NRA case that we’ve been litigating since 2018, so it’s a monumental win, stated Justin Davis, managing director of public affairs for the NRA, to reporters. The organization praised the ruling as a victory for gun owners across the United States.

The court’s ruling marks a significant point in the NRA’s efforts to challenge gun control laws nationwide. According to the NRA’s statement, the decision underlines the fundamental right to own rifles and standard-capacity magazines without interference from political agendas prioritizing regulation over constitutional rights.

U.S. Circuit Judge Arianna Freeman, appointed by President Biden, authored the majority opinion. The decision referenced key Supreme Court rulings, including District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. These cases require states to prove that firearm restrictions align with historical traditions of firearm regulation.

The court found that New Jersey did not satisfy this requirement. The state had enacted its ‘assault-firearms law’ in 1990 as a reaction to a school shooting in California. At the time, the governor described the banned weapons as having excessive capacity for destruction and efficiency in causing harm.

Despite dissent from some judges who argued these weapons are inherently dangerous and traditionally regulated by states, the majority held firm in their conclusion. The opinion underscored that such restrictions do not align with the historical precedent necessary to justify their existence under the Second Amendment.

Jasmine Baehr, a breaking news writer at Fox News Digital, provided coverage on this legal development and its implications for ongoing debates about firearm regulation.