On September 10, 2025 the Third Circuit Court of Appeals released their opinion in the combined Koons and Siegel cases. The three-judge panel heard arguments in October 2023 in Philadelphia.
The combined cases are challenges to New Jersey’s Bruen-response law enacted in December 2022. Among other things, the law outlined a dangerous patchwork of so-called “sensitive locations” for carriers to have to navigate.
The decision is a mixed bag and a much deeper dive into the 236 page opinion is going to have to occur. Cam covered initial reporting on the decision yesterday. Further, Cam provided an incredible rundown on the dissenting opinion — also yesterday. Since Cam’s coverage, we’ve made contact with a number of the plaintiffs and advocacy groups, as well as received their comments via releases.
The two-judge majority, Krause and Chung, upheld a fair amount of what they formerly stayed from the district court’s preliminary injunction. The 200 + page injunction written by District Court Judge Bumb went mostly ignored by the 3rd Circuit Court when it got to them, and they’ve affirmed much of that now. Krause wrote for the majority and participated in some interesting gymnastics to find analogues to fit what seemed to be a predetermined opinion.
As a matter of opinion given the makeup of the panel, I’ve maintained that they would try their best to split the baby on the issues. That’s exactly what it seems like they’ve done. They got as close to respecting the right enough to possibly fend off an en banc review and potential Supreme Court showdown. Considering Judge Porter’s dissent, it’s going to be tough for the rest of the 3rd Circuit to ignore his reasoning and logic, much less the High Court.
The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs reacted to the news yesterday. ANJRPC is a plaintiff in the Siegel case. In a release yesterday the Association recognized that the opinion was a “mixed ruling” and that it gutted “large portions of the favorable judgment ANJRPC obtained from the lower court back in 2023.”
“It’s a mixed decision that splits the baby on what is supposed to be a bedrock fundamental right,” said ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach. “It undermines the Constitutionally guaranteed right-to-carry, and this approach will ultimately wind up in the trash bin of history.”
Speaking on behalf of the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners, one of the plaintiffs in the Koons case, was Theresa Inacker. Inacker is a member of the board of trustees of the Coalition as well as a member of the NRA Board of Directors.
“Today’s Third Circuit decision in Koons is unconstitutional, and leaves us less safe in a violent world,” Inacker told Bearing Arms. “The majority objects to Bruen‘s history and tradition mandate, while improperly demanding the return of interest balancing.
“At a time when carry on public transit is demonstrably needed by the people of New Jersey, the panel has upheld the ban on carry there, as well as other extremely vulnerable places, like healthcare facilities, etc.
“Next steps will be taken to address these judicial errors, which were nearly two years in the making.”
New Jersey Firearms Owners Syndicate was not directly involved in either case because the organization was not officially formed at the time of filing the cases. However, Bearing Arms did discuss the ruling with multiple officials at the Syndicate. “We’re not even close to being done with this,” NJFOS President Mark Cheeseman said in an email when discussing the opinion.The organization has yet to release their official statement of analysis on the opinion.
Bearing Arms reached out to Alexander Roubian, the president of New Jersey Second Amendment Society, and he did not respond to our request for comment. NJ2AS is one of the plaintiffs in the Koons case. The group’s webpage last showed activity in 2023 and has not participated in any litigation since the 2022 filing.
Two national advocacy groups supported the Koons case as plaintiffs. Both the Firearms Policy Coalition and the Second Amendment Foundation sent out releases yesterday about the opinion.
“We are reviewing this preliminary injunction-stage decision with our objective unchanged: to end New Jersey’s immoral and unconstitutional carry bans,” FPC said in their statement. “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.”
“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,” said SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack. “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.”
“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,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “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.”
It’s not yet known what direction the groups are going to be headed next, but what’s apparent is none of them seem ready to back down. Will they call for an en banc hearing — like the Third Circuit announced they’re going to do with consolidated so-called “assault weapons” and a magazine capacity regulation challenges?
Do the groups plan on duking it out back at the district court? Might be an unlikely scenario given the court’s stance. Or perhaps they call for summary judgements to get the cases punted to the U.S. Supreme Court as fast as possible? The strategy has yet to be revealed. We’ll continue the tracking of these cases and report back when we obtain more details.
Editor’s Note: Unelected federal judges are subverting the Second Amendment and insulting the will of the people.
Help us expose out-of-control judges dead set on turning our 2A rights into privileges. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
