FPC Just Asked a New Jersey Court to Kill One-Gun-a-Month

Firearms Policy Coalition announced on September 14, 2026, that it and its co-plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment in Struck v. Davenport in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The motion asks the court to declare New Jersey’s one-gun-a-month handgun purchase ban unconstitutional and permanently enjoin it. Plaintiffs are FPC, two FPC members, and the National Rifle Association. Counsel listed: Bradley P. Lehman of Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, and Bradley A. Benbrook and Stephen M. Duvernay of Benbrook Law Group. Case documents are posted at firearmspolicy.org/struck.

FPC’s theory is the one the Ninth Circuit already accepted in Nguyen v. Bonta. The right to keep and bear arms includes the right to acquire them. California’s one-in-30 law had no “historical cousin.” The Ninth Circuit entered final judgment against that ban in 2025. FPC says New Jersey’s experts concede rationing laws “did not exist early in the country’s history,” and that the first handgun-rationing statute was not enacted until 1975. Only five states ever passed one. FPC says only New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia still have them.

FPC President Brandon Combs: “The Second Amendment protects ‘Arms’—plural. The government has no constitutional authority to ration the People’s rights and politicians do not get to decide how many protected arms peaceable people may acquire in a month. We already defeated California’s similar ban, and now we are asking the court to eliminate New Jersey’s version of the same unconstitutional scheme.” The district court has not ruled. This is a motion, not an injunction.