Claiming New Jersey’s ban on firearm suppressors is unconstitutional, a coalition of Second Amendment organizations has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the state’s prohibition, setting the stage for another high-profile legal battle which could wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court…if the court decides to take such a case.
The court’s recent track record suggests to many in the gun rights movement the justices are a bit timid about taking on landmark Second Amendment cases.
Six major groups and three private citizens filed the 26-page complaint in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The groups include the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), American Suppressor Association (ASA), National Rifle Association (NRA), Safari Club International (SCI), Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs (ANJRPC) and the New Jersey Firearms Owners Syndicate (NJFOS). Joining them are individual citizens David Padua, Michael Glenn and Brian Weber. The three individuals are all New Jersey residents and members of the various organizations, according to the complaint.
Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Daniel J. Schmutter at Hardman & Winnicki in Ridgewood, N.J., and David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson, and Athanasia O. Livas at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C.
Named as defendants are New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin and Patrick Callahan, superintendent of the New Jersey State Police, in their official capacities.
According to the lawsuit, “suppressors are commonly used to protect the hearing of hunters and those around them. Despite the potential hearing risks, up to 95% of adult hunters report not wearing hearing protection while hunting.”
The complaint further states suppressors are “commonly used as a public courtesy to prevent noise pollution from lawful target shooting in neighborhoods and communities.”
“Although suppressors do not silence gunshots,” the lawsuit clarifies, “they reduce the decibel level of gunshots. In fact, this was the reason suppressors were invented.”
The complaint quotes former acting ATF Deputy Director Ronald B. Turk, who stated in 2017 that suppressors “are very rarely used in criminal shootings.” In an ATF “White Paper” published at the time, Turk noted how opinions about “silencers” had changed across the country in recent years.
The lawsuit quotes the White Paper report: “While DOJ [the Department of Justice] and ATF have historically not supported removal of items from the NFA, the change in public acceptance of silencers arguably indicates that the reason for their inclusion in the NFA is archaic and historical reluctance to removing them from the NFA should be reevaluated.”
In a joint announcement, representatives from the six groups in the coalition discussed the importance of this legal challenge.
ASA President and Executive Director Knox Williams: “The ban on suppressors in New Jersey is an unacceptable violation of Second Amendment rights for law-abiding gun owners across the Garden State…For too long, out of touch bureaucrats in state capitols have prioritized misguided political beliefs over the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut: “Silencers are nothing more than mufflers designed to mitigate the damage caused to a users’ ears when firing a gun, no different than the muffler found on automobiles. Additionally, their use provides benefits to the surrounding communities by mitigating the noise created when shooting guns. Former President Theodore Roosevelt was known to use these devices while hunting and they are commonly used in Europe, which is anything but gun friendly.
NRA-ILA Executive Director John Commerford: “Suppressors are essential for reducing the risk of hearing loss for gun owners and hunters… This challenge is critical to defending the Second Amendment rights of New Jerseyans and protecting their health and freedoms.”
ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach: “This case will send shockwaves through the New Jersey statehouse, where lawmakers pretend that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to them. They are about to get a wake-up call like no other, and ANJRPC is proud to be a part of this historic effort.”
NJFOS Director of Legal Operations Joe Loporto: “There is nothing ‘common sense’ about a total ban on suppressors, an arm that can only be used by the people of this state to exercise their core Constitutional rights in a safer manner,.”
Safari Club International CEO W. Laird Hamberlin: “This case isn’t just about suppressors: it’s about defending the ability of hunters to pursue game safely and lawfully. SCI has a strong record of litigating to protect regulated bear hunting in New Jersey, and views this case as a continuation of our commitment… SCI stands firmly on behalf of our growing community in New Jersey, including our newly formed Garden State Chapter.”
This may seem like boilerplate, but it reflects a unified voice challenging a ban which has outlived whatever usefulness it may have ever had, which at this point seems open to question.
As noted in the complaint, “Defendants will not be able to show that history and tradition support an outright ban on the possession of common suppressors by peaceable citizens. In fact, the opposite is true. Suppressors have been lawfully used for purposes like reducing noise pollution in neighborhoods since the early 20th century.”
The lawsuit seeks an injunction against the ban, and to have the ban declared to be in violation of Second and Fourteenth amendment rights.
About Dave Workman
Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.
