Published July 17, 2026 at 1:45 PM ET · Updated July 17, 2026 at 4:04 PM ET
Court declares New Jersey's assault-weapons ban unconstitutional
3 independent outlets are covering this story. Verification: Confirmed — reported independently by wire/mainstream and conservative outlets. Patriot Watch links to original reporting; we don't republish it.
The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that New Jersey's ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines is unconstitutional. The decision was reported by the Washington Examiner, Reuters, and Bearing Arms.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 3 hr ago, when Bearing Arms reported it. Coverage has since grown to 3 independent outlets, including 1 wire/mainstream feed. The most recent report came 2 hr ago from Washington Examiner. Verification tier: Confirmed — reported independently by wire/mainstream and conservative outlets.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Under Bruen, because the Second Amendment's text presumptively covers bearable arms, New Jersey must justify its ban by demonstrating a historical tradition of comparable regulation. Caetano reinforced that the amendment reaches arms not existing at the founding and that being unusual cannot simply mean not in common use in 1789. Whether semi-automatic rifles fall outside protection is the open question the Supreme Court has now taken up.
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Kevin P. Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police 597 U.S. 1 (2022)
Vote: 6-3 · Opinion: Thomas
New York's requirement that applicants demonstrate 'proper cause' — a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community — to obtain an unrestricted public-carry license violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public. The Court held the Second Amendment protects a right to carry handguns publicly for self-defense, and rejected the two-step means-end framework lower courts had applied after Heller.
Jaime Caetano v. Massachusetts 577 U.S. 411 (2016)
Vote: Unanimous per curiam (8-member Court, post-Scalia); no recorded vote split · Opinion: Per curiam (unsigned)
Summarily vacating the SJC's judgment without briefing on the merits or oral argument, the Court held that each of the SJC's three rationales contradicted Heller: the Second Amendment extends prima facie to all bearable arms, including those not in existence at the founding; 'unusual' cannot be equated with 'not in common use in 1789'; and protection is not limited to weapons useful in warfare. The case was remanded for further proceedings; the Court did not itself hold the Massachusetts ban unconstitutional.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
