By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
Second Amendment advocates challenging New Jersey’s “Sensitive Places Law” secured a partial victory from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld a lower court’s preliminary injunction relating to private vehicles, public property, youth sports events and private property without the owner’s express consent.
In the case known as Koons v. Platkin, the court also upheld injunctions against a tax on the state’s carry permit, and a liability insurance mandate in its 139-page opinion. The majority opinion was written by Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, a Barack Obama appointee. She was joined by Judge Cindy Kyounga, a Joseph Biden appointee.
Judge David Porter, a Donald Trump appointee, joined in part and dissented in part, explaining, “Under the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence in Heller, McDonald, Bruen, and Rahimi, and our precedents in Lara II and Range II, Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the vast majority of their Second Amendment challenges to Chapter 131. The remaining preliminary-injunction factors also favor Plaintiffs and support most of the District Court’s thoughtful analysis. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent in part.”
The case was brought by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners, New Jersey Second Amendment Society and four private citizens including Ronald Koons, for whom the case is named. It was consolidated with another challenge of the New Jersey sensitive places law, brought by the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and other private citizens, as noted in the ruling.
Writing for the majority, Judge Krause observed, “This case presents our first occasion to answer the “where” question, that is, in which locations the government can permissibly proscribe carrying firearms. We therefore follow the Supreme Court’s example in Heller, Bruen, and Rahimi, examining the history of relevant firearm restrictions to discern the principles underlying the traditional scope of carry restrictions, their application, and assessing possible analogues to each challenged provision of New Jersey law.”
Reacting to the ruling, SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb stated, “By upholding the numerous carry prohibitions in New Jersey, the Third Circuit continues to tie the hands of peaceable residents who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights. This ruling flies in the face of the history and tradition of firearms regulation in the United States and we will continue to fight these draconian laws until all residents of New Jersey are unburdened.”
And Bill Sack, SAF director of Legal Operations observed, “Today, a panel of the Third Circuit concluded that ‘the People’ have the fundamental right to bear arms in public, with the minor caveat they simply can’t do so where people assemble with others, eat and drink, conduct commerce, discuss opinions, seek amusement and recreation, learn, worship, travel on public transit, seek leisure or community, and anywhere children or vulnerable people are normally present. And even then, in the remaining social wastelands leftover which the court grudgingly allows, one may only carry a firearm for self-defense if they have first secured the subjective endorsement of at least four ‘reputable’ persons. This treatment would not be tolerated in the context of any other constitutional right, and it should not be so here.”
In a statement published by The Outdoor Wire, the FPC said, “We are reviewing this preliminary injunction-stage decision with our objective unchanged: to end New Jersey’s immoral and unconstitutional carry bans. While today’s ruling offers a partial but important recognition of our position and acknowledges serious defects in the State’s laws, it does not go nearly far enough. FPC remains committed to proving—when this case moves to final judgment—that these restrictions are an assault on peaceable people and must be struck down permanently.”
