A month after a federal judge ordered New Jersey officials not to enforce a new law limiting concealed carry of guns in the state, an appellate court has allowed some of those restrictions to take effect amid ongoing legal challenges from gun rights advocates.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals granted an emergency stay late Tuesday in a 2-1 decision that will continue to ban New Jersey residents from carrying concealed handguns in so-called “sensitive places,“ including public parks, bars and restaurants, casinos and within 100 feet of public gatherings.
Gov. Phil Murphy applauded the ruling.
“I am thrilled that the Third Circuit has reinstated the vast majority of the law that I proudly signed last December to keep guns out of our most sensitive and vulnerable public places,” the Democratic governor said in a statement. “Because of this decision, guns will not be allowed to proliferate in locations such as parks, beaches, libraries, bars, and restaurants where alcohol is served.”
Murphy said the decision “will make New Jersey a safer state for all of us and will ensure that New Jersey continues to have among the lowest rates of gun violence in the nation.”
State Attorney General Matthew Platkin said the Third Circuit “recognized what we have always said: New Jersey is likely to win this case because our sensitive-places law complies with the Second Amendment.”
Platkin said the appellate panel “correctly stayed the district court’s dangerous injunction” that allowed individuals to carry weapons into places that state official feared would present a threat to public safety.
“We will continue fighting for our law,” he said.
Alexander Roubian, president of one of the plaintiff groups, the New Jersey Second Amendment Society, spoke out against the latest ruling.
“The People, especially women and minorities living in dangerous neighborhoods, deserve the same level of protection that radical left-wing judges and politicians provide themselves,” Roubian said following the ruling. “We are confident the higher courts, on appeal, will once again restore our natural and Constitutional right. Disarming the innocent is the most tyrannical and greatest form of violence.”
Attorneys for other plaintiffs who brought suit against the state did not respond to requests for comment.
The new restrictions in New Jersey followed a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that found restrictive concealed carry laws in states like New York and New Jersey violated the Second Amendment. Soon afterward, state Democratic leaders in New Jersey fast-tracked a new measure that made it easier for citizens to obtain carry permits — but tightly limited where guns were allowed.
The law signed by Murphy in December listed a list of so-called “sensitive” locations where handguns could not be carried. It also barred carrying guns on private property unless the property owner allows it, including homes, shopping centers, supermarkets, and churches.
In addition, the law raised the price of owning a gun in the state, increasing various fees and requiring those seeking to get a carry permit to purchase liability insurance and take training courses.
Also, the legislation prohibits permit-holders from keeping a loaded gun in their car.
A challenge was immediately filed by Second Amendment advocates who argued that the measure included so many forbidden zones that it was impossible for permit-holders to avoid violating the law and in May, a judge ordered state officials not to enforce many of its new restrictions.
U.S. District Court Judge Renee Marie Bumb did keep in place New Jersey’s new system for obtaining a carry permit, finding the state’s new requirements for firearms training did not conflict with the Second Amendment, which provides for reasonable restrictions on who can carry a gun.
But the judge, a President George W. Bush appointee, sharply criticized state authorities. In her 235-page ruling, Bumb said New Jersey had “failed to offer any evidence that law-abiding responsible citizens who carry firearms in public for self-defense are responsible for an increase in gun violence.”
And in issuing a preliminary injunction against the law, she wrote that even founding father Thomas Jefferson “would have warned against” the law because it would disarm law-abiding citizens.
Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com.
If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Your Privacy Rights
Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement, (updated 8/1/2024) and acknowledgement of our Privacy Policy, and Your Privacy Choices and Rights (updated 7/1/2024).
© 2024 Advance Local Media LLC. All rights reserved (About Us).
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Advance Local.
Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site.
YouTube's privacy policy is available here and YouTube's terms of service is available here.
