New Jersey Democrats Attack Third Circuit After AR-15, Magazine Ban Defeat
New Jersey’s political leadership is responding to a historic Second Amendment defeat not by explaining the Founding-era tradition the state failed to produce, but by attacking the federal judges who enforced the Constitution.
On July 17, the full Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 10-5 that New Jersey’s prohibitions on commonly owned semiautomatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds violate the Second Amendment. Days later, Attorney General Jennifer Davenport and state Senate President Nicholas Scutari condemned the decision and promised that Trenton’s fight against gun owners would continue.
Third Circuit Delivers a Major Second Amendment Victory
As AmmoLand previously reported, the en banc Third Circuit expanded a lower court’s narrow ruling involving Colt-manufactured AR-15s to cover the full class of semiautomatic rifles supported by the record.
The court also struck down New Jersey’s magazine restrictions, holding that magazines are protected “Arms” because they are necessary for many modern firearms to function as intended.
According to the Third Circuit’s opinion, approximately 24 million AR-15s and similar rifles are in circulation, along with more than 100 million 30-round AR-15 magazines. New Jersey offered no competing data capable of making those commonly owned arms “unusual.”
The court’s conclusion was direct: “Bans on weapons in common use for lawful purposes are unlawful.”
New Jersey Officials Attack the Ruling
Davenport responded through the New Jersey Attorney General’s official X account, calling the decision “as unfortunate as it is legally incorrect.”
She argued that other federal appeals courts have upheld similar restrictions, blamed AR-15s and standard-capacity magazines for mass shootings, and said New Jersey would continue treating so-called gun violence as a public-health crisis.
“We are considering our options,” Davenport added.
Statement By Attorney General Davenport on Decision in ANJRPC v. Attorney General. pic.twitter.com/nBMRkOWwSz
— Attorney General Jennifer Davenport (@NewJerseyOAG) July 17, 2026
Scutari went further. In a July 20 statement, the Democratic Senate president called the ruling a “misguided, calculated attack on public safety.”
He credited New Jersey’s gun-control regime with helping the state achieve a low firearm-death rate, although his statement offered no evidence tying that rate specifically to the state’s rifle and magazine bans.
Scutari then reached for the anti-gun movement’s favorite label, declaring that “weapons of war have no place in a civil society.” He invoked school shootings, grocery-store attacks and murdered first responders before promising that New Jersey would continue fighting decisions like this one.
It was an emotional political statement. It was not an answer to the constitutional problems with New Jersey’s law.
Public-Safety Claims Do Not Override the Constitution
Neither Davenport nor Scutari addressed the central reason the state lost: New Jersey failed to identify a sufficiently comparable historical tradition permitting the government to prohibit an entire class of commonly owned arms.
Under New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the government cannot defend a gun restriction by “simply posit[ing] that the regulation promotes an important interest.” Once the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, the government must establish that its restriction is consistent with America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
New Jersey tried to compare its bans with historical gunpowder-storage regulations and laws restricting the manner in which certain weapons could be carried. The Third Circuit rejected those comparisons. Limiting how gunpowder was stored to reduce accidental fires is not comparable to criminalizing possession of a semiautomatic rifle or a magazine containing more than ten rounds.
Nor could limited historical restrictions on carrying weapons justify a modern possession ban inside the home.
That is the part Trenton’s political leadership keeps avoiding. No matter how many times politicians call an AR-15 a “weapon of war,” the label does not transform a semiautomatic rifle owned by millions of law-abiding Americans into an unprotected arm.
The Circuit Split Is Headed Toward the Supreme Court
Davenport and Scutari are broadly correct that other federal appeals courts have upheld similar prohibitions. Those courts upheld laws within their own jurisdictions—not New Jersey’s statute—and the Third Circuit has now created a direct split over whether commonly owned semiautomatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines may be banned.
The Supreme Court has already agreed to hear Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins. Those consolidated cases ask whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect commonly owned semiautomatic rifles, including the AR-15. The question accepted by the Court does not expressly cover magazine restrictions, leaving the magazine portion of the Cheeseman ruling especially important.
New Jersey could seek a stay or ask the Supreme Court to review the decision, but neither Davenport nor Scutari has announced a specific filing. Gun owners should therefore wait for confirmation concerning the appellate mandate, any stay and further district-court proceedings before changing their conduct.
Trenton may dislike the ruling, but constitutional rights do not depend on whether New Jersey politicians consider them reasonable. The state had its opportunity to justify these bans under the test required by the Supreme Court. It failed.
About Duncan Johnson:
Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy. Duncan is a regular contributor to AmmoLand News and serves as part of the editorial team responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.