In the modern political climate, it is rare that partisan topics receive bipartisan support. However, yesterday’s United States House of Representatives vote on H.R. 2267, the NICS Data Reporting Act, demonstrated that, while Second Amendment issues typically create a party divide, Democrats on Capitol Hill can cross the aisle on issues involving fundamental fairness, albeit intertwined with the right to keep and bear arms. But it also serves as a shameful reminder to their New Jersey colleagues who put party before principle.
What’s the story here? It’s actually quite simple. It’s the same story – seeking transparency on denials for firearms – but with two different outcomes.
At the federal level, Representative Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) introduced H.R. 2267, a very simple bill composed of just a couple of sentences that requires the Attorney General of the United States to submit an annual report to Congress that includes the demographic data of persons determined to be ineligible to purchase a firearm based on a background check performed by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
“Currently, NICS results in too many false denials… By showing this with data that’s already collected, but not currently reported, I hope to generate bipartisan interest in making NICS less prone to false denials,” said Massie in a statement.
The bipartisan support was unanimous and passed in a May 12 voice vote, meaning the vocal consensus was so overwhelmingly in support of the measure that no individual names or exact tallies were recorded. (The bill now moves to the Senate Judiciary Committee.)
Now, shift your attention to New Jersey, where, despite Governor Sherrill’s promise of transparency in government, that is not the case when it comes to Second Amendment issues.
In 2026, the office of the Attorney General stopped updating the Permit to Carry dashboard, a public portal that reports statistics on the approval and denial of licenses across the state. Only after receiving strong feedback from the public (you can still voice your opinion) did the AG reluctantly update the dashboard in March. However, as of this writing, there is no data for April. That has led many to ask, “Why?”
To help rectify this lack of transparency, in January, Assemblypeople Dawn Fantasia and Robert Auth introduced A222, a measure almost identical to that of Thomas Massie, which received bipartisan support in Congress. The measure simply calls for the state Attorney General to compile and publicly report certain statistics pertaining to permits to carry for handguns and firearm purchaser identification cards.
The status of that bill? Dead on arrival in the Assembly Public Safety and Preparedness Committee. No committee hearings, markups, votes, or floor action have occurred. No amendments filed. No recorded votes. All because of the intransigence of Democrats.
So, why are New Jersey Democrats so dug in on this issue?
Trenton loves “equity” talk until the data might expose how subjective licensing criteria hit certain groups harder. The fact that the state has denied black applicants for a Permit to Carry at rates far higher than white applicants has been well documented by News2A contributor and award-winning journalist, John Petrolino. And recent reporting shows that the disparity is likely much higher than first thought, with denials for blacks 10 times higher than for whites.
New Jersey’s firearms licensing laws are rooted in centuries of racism, a fact documented in this editorial by NRA state director and director of legal operations at NJFOS, Joe LoPorto.
New Jersey Democrats have the opportunity to embrace both transparency and bipartisanship, just like their federal colleagues have, but they have thus far chosen not to.
