Litigants in New Jersey AWB / Mag Ban Case Brief SCOTUS: Third Circuit Got It Right

WASHINGTON — New Jersey cases addressing so-called assault weapons and magazine bans continue to take the national spotlight and in some cases may be ground zero for future precedent, a proposition furthered in a recent filing with the Supreme Court by the litigants in one of the state’s most well-known cases.

On November 4, the litigants representing New Jersey gun owners in Davenport v. Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, told the Supreme Court that not only should it hold New Jersey’s appeal petition to the court until it hears the upcoming Viramontes case addressing AR-15s, but that “[t]he en banc Third Circuit correctly held that New Jersey’s ban on AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles violates the Second Amendment, as does New Jersey’s ban on the ammunition feeding devices that come standard with them…”

The 21-page briefing is a response to New Jersey’s October 1 motion to SCOTUS asking it to hold the case pending the outcome in Viramontes v. Cook County / Grant v. Higgins, the court’s first-ever case addressing AR-15s.

A slightly simpler version of the same timeline events:

• New Jersey lost its AWB / mag ban case at the Third Circuit
• The Third Circuit then stayed its own ruling pending a related Supreme Court case
• New Jersey then appealed to the Supreme Court but asked the court to hold the petition in light of the outcome in the same case

Today’s responsive filing by respondents also asks the court to hold New Jersey’s petition, in a rare instance agreeing with New Jersey on the procedural aspect, but differing dramatically in principle, noting, “And while that case does not directly involve feeding devices, this Court’s decision may provide guidance on that aspect of New Jersey’s ban as well.”

Another reason for the court to hold the petition, from the view of grassroots gun owners backing this case, is efficient litigation:

But respondents also recognize that denying the petition now could waste resources by requiring the parties to continue litigating the remainder of the case – including the pending challenges to New Jersey’s ban on semiautomatic pistols and shotguns, see supra p.7-8 – before this Court provides further guidance on how courts should analyze arms bans in Viramontes and Grant.

And naturally, should SCOTUS rule favorably on the AR-15 issue, respondents advise that they should deny New Jersey’s petition, writing, “To the extent this Court decides those cases consistent with how the en banc Third Circuit decided this case, then the Court can and should deny the petition at that time.”

“New Jersey lost before the full Third Circuit, and we’re not giving back an inch of that win. No amount of legal maneuvering by these tyrants changes the fact that New Jersey’s bans on common semiautomatic rifles and magazines are unconstitutional. Now, with our Viramontes case being heard by the Supreme Court in just a few weeks, we’re positioned to take that victory nationwide,” said Firearms Policy Coalition President Brandon Combs in a statement. Firearms Policy Coalition is backing this case.