FPC twitter stream of court arguments:
2 Likes
Yes Judge Mascott did officially get sworn in today. If all goes right we have an 8-6 majority.
1 Like
PHILADELPHIA — New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin today released the following statement ahead of oral arguments before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in ANJRPC v. Platkin:
“New Jersey’s common-sense gun safety laws have been responsible for back-to-back record low numbers of shootings in our state in the last two years and being on track to beat that record again this year – but this significant achievement is under threat by the gun lobby seeking to bolster their profits at the cost of the lives of New Jerseyans. Over the course of the Murphy Administration, we have never wavered in our commitment to saving lives in our state. Whether it is establishing our Statewide Affirmative Firearms Enforcement Office and bringing successful suits to hold gun industry members accountable, successfully defending New Jersey’s concealed carry restrictions and other gun safety laws after the Bruen decision, or working with Governor Murphy to enact the most significant gun safety reforms in the history of our state, we have always fought to protect lives in New Jersey, and we have built up a record of success. We look forward to today’s oral arguments and to continuing this important work.”
The oral arguments are being held before an en banc panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. In today’s hearing, the Office of the Attorney General will defend New Jersey’s longstanding assault weapon and large capacity magazine restrictions–common-sense gun safety laws that were first enacted 35 years ago and continue to protect New Jerseyans today.
Poorly suited for civilian self-defense while well-suited for military combat and crime, these weapons and magazines are designed for long-range combat scenarios to kill as many combatants as quickly as possible. These weapons and LCMs are disproportionately used in mass shootings across the country, including the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting, the Las Vegas mass shooting, the Pulse Nightclub shooting, and many other horrific acts of violence.
To date, every Circuit to consider Second Amendment challenges to similar bans after the Bruen decision has rejected them. This morning, Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum will present oral argument to the Third Circuit to do the same.
#FPM and #FMP
SAF twitter stream:
1 Like
I listened to the 3rd court’s appeal and in my humble opinion the state did not meet its proof of burden.
1 Like
Feigenbaum’s arguments hold about as much water as the colander I drain my cooked past through.
And the judge who brought up bump stocks was just trying to obfuscate and confuse the matter.
Now, let me live long enough for their decision to come down (on OUR side, of course)
PASTA, that is.
NJ is trying to scare the court into upholding the ban by saying that counting an item to determine if it is in common use would make machine guns and bump stocks Constitutionally protected as well.
They are also trying to argue that rifles are too unusually dangerous to be carried for self defense.
They should be slapped down and told to stick to the issue at hand which is mere possession of rifles. Carrying them for self defense on the street is not even on the table.
I think the court will see through their bullshit.
It is “macaroni” 
I didn’t catch the session from the very beginning, but too much emphasis was put on sporting and self defense, all the while, largely ignoring the elephant in the room; 2A has nothing to do with hunting or olympic competition. But that is what 2A has been reduced to.
2A was meant to ensure the people (whether regular or irregular militia) had parity in capability and power with the government. 2A is meant to discourage the government from becoming tyrannical, and to defend the USA should it ever be invaded, not for shooting rimfire rifles while wearing snow skis.
Historically and traditionally (since tradition means so much to the anti 2A faction), ALL males between the ages of 18 and 35 are considered part of the militia.
In 1789, a bolt action 30-06 would have been unusual, yet here we are in 2025 with no prohibition on owning a 1903A3. In Pennsylvania (an most of America), there is nothing unusual about owning a semi-auto AR-15 with a flash hider, threaded muzzle, adjustable stock, bayo lug, standard capacity 30 rd mag.
Machine guns are only unusual because they have been restricted. If not for the NFA and GCA, there would be nothing unusual about them. The state focused a lot on “dangerous and unusual” which is subjective.
There are over 2.5 million M16 and M4 rifles in circulation globally, so the only thing unusual about them is that very few are in the hands of citizens, e.g., the people. Scarcity in the civilian (militia) population is a result of making ownership out of the ordinary by regulation, not by features.
All weapons are dangerous, so there is nothing unusual about that.
In the days of the Brown Bess, Americans (the militia) were obliged to have the most modern and capable weapon of the time, Ol’ Bess. If the 2A was strictly applied today, all citizens would be obliged to own a select fire M16 or M4.
1 Like
Recording of today’s oral arguments (official 3rd circuit recording will be available later):
(pay no attention to the name of the video poster…. 
)
2 Likes
Mark Cheeseman of NJFOS’s comment on today’s proceedings:
My assessment of today’s AWB argument. First I was thrilled to see Justice Mascott take her place on the panel. Her questions showed an understanding and sincere interest in second amendment rights. She is definitely a textual reader of the Constitution.
The state presented a rather confusing argument that they had trouble communicating the argument in any kind of a coherent discussion.
The justices asked some great questions and our side were able to have a relaxed discussion and give precise answers to those justices questions. The state seemed more interested in theory and subjective reasoning with their answers. Justice Hardiman conveyed simple analogies to cancel out any notion of mass shootings and correlations to weapons of common use.
There was one glaring question that I don’t think was covered. Our assult weapons ban is written to include different features and firearms mixed together. This may pose a problem with an opinion on retraction stocks and other components. Bump stocks are definitely not going to be unbanned.
All in all I think we have a win on mags . 30 rounds were specifically discussed as common as well as 15 rounds.
Good job by all organizations involved and all attorneys representing.
3 Likes
The states arguments were insane and I hope they post the video so I can see the judges faces.
1 Like
Four Boxes Diner breaks it down.
1 Like
I have the feeling Platkin is gonna get his shit pushed in.
Good luck to yall!
3 Likes
Washington Gun Law and NJFOS Joe LoPorto are recapping the arguments in a youtube discussion this morning 11:00 AM Eastern:
“Training Day” reference 
1 Like
Great video!
2 Likes