As ANJRPC announced in its previous alert, federal Judge Renee Bumb issued a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) in our carry case Siegel v. Platkin. The TRO expands the number of sections of the new “carry killer” law (Chapter 131 or A4769) that the State temporarily may not enforce until further court order. The TRO also restrains certain pre-existing prohibitions as well. The Court also clarified that certain provisions of the law are to be interpreted narrowly, thereby reducing the restrictive scope of the law. The provisions of law that currently may not be enforced under the TRO are as follows: 7(a)(10): a park, beach, recreation facility or area or playground owned or controlled by a State, county or local government unit, or any part of such a place, which is designated as a gun-free zone by the governing authority based on considerations of public safety. [The prohibition on carry in playgrounds is still enforceable for now.] N.J.A.C. 7:2–2.17(b) [preexisting law]: State Park Service property. 7(a)(12): a publicly owned or leased library or museum. 7(a)(15): a bar or restaurant where alcohol is served, and any other site or facility where alcohol is sold for consumption on the premises. 7(a)(17): a privately or publicly owned and operated entertainment facility within this State, including but not limited to a theater, stadium, museum, arena, racetrack or other place where performances, concerts, exhibits, games or contests are held. 7(a)(18): a casino and related facilities, including but not limited to appurtenant hotels, retail premises, restaurant and bar facilities, and entertainment and recreational venues located within the casino property. N.J.A.C. 13:69D–1.13 [preexisting law]: within a casino or casino simulcasting facility. 7(a)(24): private property, unless the owner has provided express consent or has posted a sign indicating that it is permissible to carry on the premises. The Court also acknowledged the State’s concession that “school, college, university, or other educational institution” is to be read narrowly to apply to traditional schools such as are regulated by the State. Thus, the prohibition on carrying in schools does not apply to, for example, motorcycle classes, firearms training, Sunday school within a church, karate classes, and music lessons. Further, the Court acknowledged the State’s concession that notwithstanding the very broad language used in the statute (“any part of the buildings, grounds, or parking area”) the scope of prohibition on multiuse property (strip malls, office buildings, churches with schools, etc.) is limited only to the actual prohibited use itself and not other uses and also does not include shared features such as shared parking lots, hallways, elevators, etc. The next stage is our request for a preliminary injunction, which seeks to block the enforcement of the law all the way through the end of the case. We plan to aggressively seek to add more places to the list of restrictions we have successfully challenged. If you are not already subscribed to these free email alerts, click here to sign up -- there will be critical updates and alerts coming in the near future. |
