New Jersey’s AR-15 Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

It seems the Garden State’s gun-grabbing ways have hit a constitutional snag. In a twist that’s sure to ruffle some liberal feathers, a federal judge has decided New Jersey’s ban on AR-15 rifles is about as constitutional as a tofu turkey at Thanksgiving dinner. Let’s dive into this juicy ruling and see what it means for our cherished Second Amendment rights across the nation.

Federal Judge Strikes Down NJ’s AR-15 Ban

U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan has ruled that New Jersey’s ban on AR-15 rifles is unconstitutional, dealing a significant blow to the state’s strict gun control measures. This decision, influenced by the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling expanding gun rights, could have far-reaching implications for similar laws across the country.

Judge Sheridan’s ruling specifically targets the state’s prohibition on certain semi-automatic rifles, commonly referred to as “assault weapons.” However, it’s important to note that the judge upheld the state’s ban on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, maintaining that this restriction does not violate the Second Amendment.

New Jersey's ban on AR-15 rifles is unconstitutional, federal judge says | ABC News

New Jersey’s ban on the AR-15 rifle is unconstitutional, but the state’s cap on magazines over 10 rounds passes constitutional muster

New Jersey's ban on the AR-15 rifle is unconstitutional, but… pic.twitter.com/rCBdPWZQ1t

— Owen Gregorian (@OwenGregorian) July 31, 2024

Implications of the Ruling

The decision has sent shockwaves through both pro-gun and gun control circles, with both sides preparing for appeals. Judge Sheridan has temporarily delayed the enforcement of his ruling for 30 days, giving the state time to appeal and potentially seek a stay of the decision.

“It is hard to accept the Supreme Court’s pronouncements that certain firearms policy choices are ‘off the table’ when frequently, radical individuals possess and use these same firearms for evil purposes” – U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan

This ruling could have significant implications for nine other states and the District of Columbia, which have similar laws banning certain types of semi-automatic rifles. Gun rights advocates are likely to use this decision as a springboard for challenging similar bans across the country.

Reactions and Future Challenges

The ruling has elicited strong reactions from both sides of the gun debate. Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition, celebrated the decision, stating:

“Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons‘ are immoral and unconstitutional. FPC will continue to fight forward until all of these bans are eliminated throughout the United States” – Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition

On the other hand, New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin expressed disappointment with the ruling, arguing that it undermines public safety. Governor Phil Murphy, who has enhanced the state’s gun laws during his tenure, also voiced his opposition to the decision.

“I was compelled to rule as I did because of the Supreme Court’s rulings in firearms cases, particularly the 2022 Bruen decision that expanded gun rights” – U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan

As both sides prepare for appeals, this case is likely to make its way through higher courts, potentially setting the stage for another Supreme Court decision on gun rights. The outcome could significantly shape the landscape of gun legislation across the United States for years to come.