Posted: 7/18/2026 8:08:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: DaveM4P99][Edited]
|
In case anyone missed it...a full 3rd circuit en banc panel struck down the NJ (and Delaware and USVI) AWB and Mag cap laws. Permanently. The vote was 10-1-4, and the (very strong and scathing) majority opinion was written by a black female Biden appointee, who apparently knows how to read the constitution and Bruen. And now with a circuit split, SCOTUS will now very likely have to issue a MUCH broader opinion on AWBs, mag laws, licensing schemes, fees etc. This is big because a circuit split often results in the high court having to release a much broader opinion, rather than just telling the lower courts how they got it wrong. Our 2A briefs for Viramontes, and the incoming briefs for granting cert on Barnett (PICA) can now cite the circuit split and argue that the broader restrictions in PICA (like mag bans and registration) need to be addressed now rather than later through a GVR. Even though it's the 3rd circuit, I think everyone in NY can safely assume their regular ARs and standard capacity mags are legal. Sure, wait a year for SCOTUS to decide Viramontes, or don't. We are winning. |
|
Originally Posted By DaveM4P99: In case anyone missed it...a full 3rd circuit en banc panel struck down the NJ (and Delaware and USVI) AWB and Mag cap laws. Permanently. The vote was 10-1-4, and the (very strong and scathing) majority opinion was written by a black female Biden appointee, who apparently knows how to read the constitution and Bruen. And now with a circuit split, SCOTUS will now very likely have to issue a MUCH broader opinion on AWBs, mag laws, licensing schemes, fees etc. This is big because a circuit split often results in the high court having to release a much broader opinion, rather than just telling the lower courts how they got it wrong. Our 2A briefs for Viramontes, and the incoming briefs for granting cert on Barnett (PICA) can now cite the circuit split and argue that the broader restrictions in PICA (like mag bans and registration) need to be addressed now rather than later through a GVR. Even though it's the 3rd circuit, I think everyone in NY can safely assume their regular ARs and standard capacity mags are legal. Sure, wait a year for SCOTUS to decide Viramontes, or don't. We are winning. The first step in being free is to live like you are. |
|
Originally Posted By DaveM4P99: Even though it's the 3rd circuit, I think everyone in NY can safely assume their regular ARs and standard capacity mags are legal. Sure, wait a year for SCOTUS to decide Viramontes, or don't. We are winning. Thankfully we have New Jersey to watch at the moment to see what kind of nonsense their legislature comes up with the circumvent the 3rd Circuit ruling. And if they get it passed before the end of the year it could be a signal to SCOTUS on exactly how they should rule to stop it from propagating to the other states. |
|
Originally Posted By Aardvark: I would certainly wait. I would put money down in the prediction markets that New York WILL have a response bill ready to go by the time a SCOTUS decision is released next year. Any loophole that SCOTUS leaves open, such as licensing along with high fees, registration along with high fees, feature restrictions like the bayonet lug or flash suppressor, etc. will certainly be a stumbling block. Hopefully SCOTUS finally authors a ruling that is broad enough to cover these issues. Thankfully we have New Jersey to watch at the moment to see what kind of nonsense their legislature comes up with the circumvent the 3rd Circuit ruling. And if they get it passed before the end of the year it could be a signal to SCOTUS on exactly how they should rule to stop it from propagating to the other states. All great points...honestly let's hope NJ goes full retard in defiance... so SCOTUS has a roadmap for their ruling and maybe preempts NY going full retard But let's be honest...with just the most recent rulings from SCOTUS, NY's laws are already toast. |
|
Originally Posted By DaveM4P99: This will likely cause SCOTUS to take this case, along with the Duncan vs. Bonta case out of CA, which challenges magazine bans too. So... thank you for creating a circuit split NJ! They are shooting themselves in the foot, for sure. The SCOTUS already agreed to take an AWB and Mag ban before this ruling. |
|
Originally Posted By Zero6: The SCOTUS already agreed to take an AWB and Mag ban before this ruling. Originally Posted By Zero6: Originally Posted By DaveM4P99: This will likely cause SCOTUS to take this case, along with the Duncan vs. Bonta case out of CA, which challenges magazine bans too. So... thank you for creating a circuit split NJ! They are shooting themselves in the foot, for sure. The SCOTUS already agreed to take an AWB and Mag ban before this ruling. @Zero6 Viramontes and the IL case are really just AWB cases. The IL AWB does have some fringe mag capacity laws as part of their oddly worded AW laws...but it's not a clear cut magazine case. Duncan and the NJ cases are both strong magazine cases that are at odds with each other. So the circuit split probably means SCOTUS will either take these cases, or fold them into Viramontes. |