I recall hearing something on GFH from Dan Schmutter about the mag case that it was basically a challenge to get us back to 15 rounds. Is this correct? And if so, what ELSE has to happen to get us back to standard capacity? Meaning, is standard cap now TWO court cases down the road?

Here's the latest I could find:

Civil Action 3:18-cv-10507

https://casetext.com/case/assn-of-nj-rifle-pistol-clubs-v-platkin

seems like they are punting as long as they can

It seems the State asked for more  time in Nov in order to research historical precedence to back up the law.  That was 3 months ago.  Is there a timeline of how long they have or a date set for the next course of action?  

 

Curious why they would sue to go back to 15 rounds.  Why not just try for no limit, as in free states?

11 minutes ago, Old Glock guy said:

Curious why they would sue to go back to 15 rounds.  Why not just try for no limit, as in free states?

That is a good question.  If the state is asking for more time to "research historical precedence", as @ESB noted above, then standard capacity would seem to be that precedence.

45 minutes ago, Old Glock guy said:

Curious why they would sue to go back to 15 rounds.  Why not just try for no limit, as in free states?

Low hanging fruit.

I'd like to know if anyone has done a study to see if the 10rd restriction has reduced gun crime in NJ.  Maybe we should ask that politician from So. Amboy.  Oh, wait, she dead.

I believe that when these cases go to their review (post Bruen) in the 3rd District Court, that the 10 round limit on mags here will go away, not back to the 1991 limit of 15,

Please, my mouth to G-d's ears!

The original complaint asked to restore the 15 round limit. That was filed in June 2018.

After the case was GVR'd after Bruen, it made its way back down to the district court.

On October 28, 2022, the plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint asking the court for a declaration that a ban on magazines greater that 10 rounds was unconstitutional. This is basically changing the case to unlimited capacity instead of reverting to 15 rounders.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.378098/gov.uscourts.njd.378098.122.0.pdf

55 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

The original complaint asked to restore the 15 round limit. That was filed in June 2018.

After the case was GVR'd after Bruen, it made its way back down to the district court.

On October 28, 2022, the plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint asking the court for a declaration that a ban on magazines greater that 10 rounds was unconstitutional. This is basically changing the case to unlimited capacity instead of reverting to 15 rounders.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.378098/gov.uscourts.njd.378098.122.0.pdf

Thanks you for this! With any luck it won't take 4 years for the state to do its "research."

16 hours ago, Xtors said:

Thanks you for this! With any luck it won't take 4 years for the state to do its "research."

"They" will drag this out as long as "they" can.

On 2/22/2023 at 12:01 PM, ESB said:

It seems the State asked for more  time in Nov in order to research historical precedence to back up the law.  That was 3 months ago.  Is there a timeline of how long they have or a date set for the next course of action?  

 

I believe they are in Discovery right now, so no hard dates a present while both parties submit documentation. The NJ AG recieved 1 extensions already on finding historical and relevant information. I wouldnt be shocked, but its not a good look per say to request another extension after 9 months. The courts should be asking if they haven't found what they need to argue the case... public information, then they probably will never find it because it doesn't exist. So the AG would have to offer some kind of reason for the extension. 

Current time line said 9 months. I think that puts it in April to have completed Discovery and set dates for hearings. 

The 4 year timeline I beleive is for appeals to SCOTUS to have the matter "officially" ruled on. This could be done and over at the lower courts by next year if it goes in our favor. 

 

I bet this gets struck down in the district court, which is a major win for NJ. I ALSO beleive the state will forgo appeals. Similar to Delawares ruling on manufacturing firearms lacking a serial number, these States have figured if they can't win in District courts there is no way to reverse the ruling in their respective higher courts which are sure to scrutinize their BS even more. I think a lot of them are seeing the short sighted mistake that NY did with the 2nd circuit, which yes bought them some time, but they know they are going to lose, and THAT decision will be far reaching compared to the District decision if they just let it stand. 

30 minutes ago, JackDaWack said:

I bet this gets struck down in the district court, which is a major win for NJ. I ALSO beleive the state will forgo appeals. Similar to Delawares ruling on manufacturing firearms lacking a serial number, these States have figured if they can't win in District courts there is no way to reverse the ruling in their respective higher courts which are sure to scrutinize their BS even more. I think a lot of them are seeing the short sighted mistake that NY did with the 2nd circuit, which yes bought them some time, but they know they are going to lose, and THAT decision will be far reaching compared to the District decision if they just let it stand. 

I agree. 

They have to be fricking kidding!

Discovery for the mag ban case - the one that has a record filled enough to get all the way up to SCOTUS and back since 2018 - is scheduled to last until at least OCTOBER!

Is there some rule that say if you have successfully infringed on the 2nd Amendment long enough, it is OK to keep doing it?

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.378098/gov.uscourts.njd.378098.154.0.pdf

In case anyone is in any doubt - yes I'm pissed!

9 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

They have to be fricking kidding!

Discovery for the mag ban case - the one that has a record filled enough to get all the way up to SCOTUS and back since 2018 - is scheduled to last until at least OCTOBER!

Is there some rule that say if you have successfully infringed on the 2nd Amendment long enough, it is OK to keep doing it?

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.378098/gov.uscourts.njd.378098.154.0.pdf

In case anyone is in any doubt - yes I'm pissed!

Sucks, but remember that the mag ban case was combined with post-Bruen AWB case that has not been briefed/argued yet.

41 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

Sucks, but remember that the mag ban case was combined with post-Bruen AWB case that has not been briefed/argued yet.

I know, but how can they justify continuing to infringe on 2A for months? There needs to be a PI now - actually, there should have been a PI in 2018.

5 minutes ago, Mr.Stu said:

I know, but how can they justify continuing to infringe on 2A for months? There needs to be a PI now - actually, there should have been a PI in 2018.

Because Bruen is a sea change in 2A litigation, and not all of the judiciary is on board with it yet.  Another year or two and the majority of 2A-infringing litigation passed will get TRO'd right out of the gate, like the carry-killer bill was.

We effectively had carry infringed for, what, ~50 years in NJ, and that infringement was upheld by several court decisions prior to Bruen.

That's all true and irrelevant.

Now that we do have Bruen, the answer is very, very clear. Judge Bumb is expediting the carry cases and getting shit done.

The Judge in charge of the magazine case is slow walking it and putting in as many delays as NJ is asking for. Oath to uphold the Constitution? Yeah, right!

It's 3 cases in one.

And the steps in the schedule really don't look oppressive.

So let's cut Judge Goodman some slack and hope that Lois is as much on the side of Liberty as Renee seems to be ... so far.

Hey, this is STILL the Glorious PRNJ, isn't it ??

I love when she asked the state "do you have any evidence of permit holders committing crimes'?

On 3/17/2023 at 4:44 PM, Mr.Stu said:

That's all true and irrelevant.

Now that we do have Bruen, the answer is very, very clear. Judge Bumb is expediting the carry cases and getting shit done.

The Judge in charge of the magazine case is slow walking it and putting in as many delays as NJ is asking for. Oath to uphold the Constitution? Yeah, right!

Who is the judge in the magazine case?  If intentionally slow walking it and doing what NJ asks for that does not bode well for us law abiding citizens.  

On 3/17/2023 at 9:20 PM, Tunaman said:

I love when she asked the state "do you have any evidence of permit holders committing crimes'?

what was his repl?

1 hour ago, 1LtCAP said:

what was his repl?

2 minutes ago, DirtyDigz said:

that answer by itself should blow their entire  case outta the water