NRA-ILA Asks Supreme Court to Strike New Jersey’s Magazine Restriction

Today the National Rifle Association of America’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC) asked the Supreme Court to hear their challenge to New Jersey’s prohibition on magazines capable of accepting more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

New Jersey began restricting magazines in 1990, by outlawing magazines capable of accepting more than 15 rounds. But that was not enough for the gun-grabbing politicians in the Garden State. In 2018, the legislature arbitrarily redefined “large capacity ammunition magazine” to have a 10-round limit—despite the fact that larger magazines are the standard for many of the most popular firearms. “Millions of Americans have purchased magazines with that capacity,” the petition argues, “and hundreds of millions are in circulation.” The petition further argues that “Although these magazines enjoy a long historical tradition, there is no similar tradition of government regulation. There were no restrictions on magazine capacity at all at the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment.” 

This case comes to the Court from a sharply divided panel of the Third Circuit court of appeals. There in a dissenting opinion, Judge Bibas criticized the majority for applying “armchair reasoning” to uphold the law. Many other courts are divided on the issue, too. Another NRA-ILA-supported case challenging California’s 10-round magazine ban will be heard before an 11-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit in June after being stricken by a three-judge panel last fall.  

This is the second time that the NRA-ILA has asked the high court to take a case in the last five months. In December, it asked the Court to review a challenge to New York’s restrictive process for issuing carry permits. The Court agreed to hear that case today. It is also the second time that NRA-ILA and ANJRPC have brought case to the Court in recent years. In 2018, the groups brought a case challenging the New Jersey’s may-issue concealed-carry regime. It was one of many cases that the Court declined to take last summer. It was, however, the case that drew a scathing dissent form Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh. We are hopeful that we can get more than just a dissent here.

The case is called Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc., v. Gurbir S. Grewal.

Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org for future updates on this and all of ILA’s efforts to defend your constitutional rights.