Appeals court revives suit over NJ firearms law
The judges did not decide whether the law is constitutional.
A federal appeals court has cleared the way for a legal challenge to a New Jersey law that lets the state sue gun manufacturers and dealers for engaging in conduct it deems a public nuisance.
On Sept. 8, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that a lower court erred when it declined to consider the merits of a National Shooting Sports Foundation lawsuit claiming the statute violates the Commerce Clause, the First Amendment and the Second Amendment.
The case stems from a four-year-old firearms law that allows New Jersey officials to sue members of the gun industry — including makers, sellers, importers, marketers and distributors — that the state believes unlawfully or unreasonably contribute to a public nuisance.
Under the law, the gun industry must also establish and enforce “reasonable controls regarding its manufacture, sale, distribution, importing, and marketing of gun-related products,” according to the lawsuit.
Shortly after state lawmakers passed the measure in 2022, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) challenged it, arguing that it violates federal protections for the gun industry.
But the appellate court threw out the lawsuit in 2023 because the NSSF failed to show an imminent risk of enforcement. In other words, the state hadn’t actually sued anyone yet, so the prospect of potential consequences for the foundation’s members was too speculative.
The state has since begun to actively enforce the law and has taken several companies to court over alleged violations.
That includes 2023 complaints against two Pennsylvania companies that allegedly sold ghost gun kits to customers who then brought them into New Jersey, as well as a December 2023 suit against a Montville gun shop that allegedly failed to secure a stack of firearms that was later stolen. The state also sued Glock, an NSSF member, in December 2024 for allegedly selling pistols that can be easily converted into automatic firearms.
The NSSF resurrected its lawsuit and argued that its members faced a real risk of enforcement and potential harm.
Judge Zahid H. Quraishi ruled in July of 2025 that the foundation could pursue the claim, but he declined to consider its merits, citing a legal principle that generally prevents federal courts from interfering with active state cases.
The appeals court disagreed on Tuesday, saying the principle doesn’t apply because the state didn’t sue the foundation, only its members.
“It is undisputed that NSSF is not a party to any ongoing state court action,” the appellate judges wrote in their 24-page ruling.
The judges did not rule on the law’s constitutionality, instead reversing the district court’s order and sending the case back. to the lower court
The foundation did not respond on Wednesday to a request for comment.
Steve Janoski is an award-winning investigative journalist with nearly two decades of experience covering criminal justice, policing, courts, government, and politics. His reporting has exposed corruption, government malfeasance, and police misconduct. His work has appeared in the New York Post, USA Today, The Associated Press, The Record, and the Asbury Park Press. At The Jersey Vindicator, he covers criminal justice. Reach Steve at steve AT jerseyvindicator.org.