Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit challenging the state’s ban on body armor purchases by civilians Monday.
The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) sued James in July 2024 on behalf of three New York residents who wished to purchase body armor for personal protection. In documents filed Monday, James argued that the FPC shouldn’t even be allowed involvement in the suit.
“FPC lacks standing because they cannot bring suit vicariously on behalf of their members, and because they cannot demonstrate any injury in their own right,” James said in the memo addressed to the United States District Court for the Western District of New York.
James also argued in the filing that body armor was “dangerous and unusual” and thereby excluded from Second Amendment protection, claiming that those who authored the Constitution weren’t aware of it. James’ argument there ignores the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in Caetano v. Massachusetts, which threw out a ban on stun guns.
“While stun guns were not in existence at the end of the 18th century, the same is true for the weapons most commonly used today for self-defense, namely, revolvers and semiautomatic pistols,” Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a concurring opinion. “Revolvers were virtually unknown until well into the 19th century, and semiautomatic pistols were not invented until near the end of that century. Electronic stun guns are no more exempt from the Second Amendment’s protections, simply because they were unknown to the First Congress, than electronic communications are exempt from the First Amendment, or electronic imaging devices are exempt from the Fourth Amendment.”
New York enacted its ban on private ownership of body armor in the aftermath of a May 2022 mass shooting in a Buffalo supermarket that left ten people dead.
“Modern ballistic body armor, a tactical asset originally engineered for the battlefield, is ‘unusually dangerous’ precisely because it neutralizes the foundational premise of public defense: that the ‘good guy with a gun’ (particularly a law enforcement officer) can stop the ‘bad guy with a gun,” James claimed. “It fundamentally alters the dynamic of armed confrontation, transforming its wearer from a vulnerable participant into a fortified threat.”
“The unusually dangerous nature of modern ballistic body armor is demonstrated by the way it has become a key part of the modern mass shooter’s toolkit,” James continued. “As detailed by Dr. Jaclyn Schildkraut, a leading expert on mass shootings, the use of tactical gear by mass shooters has steadily and alarmingly increased over the last two decades.”
The NRA took issue with James’ characterization of body armor in a statement provided to the Daily Caller News Foundation.
“Attorney General Letitia James and her allies in New York want to tell law-abiding citizens that they have no right to protect themselves with body armor. The Second Amendment isn’t limited to firearms; it protects our fundamental right to self-defense,” the NRA said. “Body armor doesn’t harm anyone; it saves lives by giving good people a fighting chance against violent criminals who don’t follow the law. New Yorkers deserve the tools to defend their families, not a government that strips away their ability to stay safe while criminals roam free.”
The Supreme Court’s June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen struck down New York’s “discretionary” concealed-carry permit law on Second Amendment grounds. FPC President Brandon Combs referenced that case and other court defeats suffered by James when reached for comment.
“Letitia James’s hilariously bad response to our motion to end New York’s unconstitutional body armor ban is one of the most panicked, desperate briefs we’ve read-at least since their last brief,” Combs told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “They tried their best to magically turn a pile of lead into legal gold, but failed miserably-as could be expected from a State that seems hell-bent on continuing its Second Amendment losing streak from the Supreme Court down.”
“We’re looking forward to ending this ban, whatever it takes. Stay tuned for more fireworks in this critical case to protect the human right to defensive arms and armor,” Combs continued.
All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
Republished with permission from Daily Caller News Foundation
