The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled on September 8 that the National Shooting Sports Foundation has standing to challenge New Jersey's gun-industry public-nuisance law and that the federal case is not barred by Younger abstention. The panel reversed the District of New Jersey's order without deciding whether the state law is constitutional or preempted. That distinction matters: the decision reopens the courthouse door for NSSF, but it does not invalidate New Jersey's law or end any state enforcement case.
The Third Circuit's opinion in NSSF v. Attorney General New Jersey was issued in case No. 25-2546 by Judges Porter, Matey and Ambro. The panel heard argument on June 2. NSSF's federal case, No. 3:22-cv-6646, challenges a 2022 New Jersey statute commonly called A1765, codified at N.J.S. sections 2C:58-33 and following.
The law and the case's second trip up
A1765 applies to firearm sellers, manufacturers, distributors, importers and marketers. It bars those businesses from knowingly or recklessly creating, maintaining or contributing to a public nuisance through conduct that is unlawful or unreasonable under the circumstances. It separately requires them to establish, implement and enforce "reasonable controls" over manufacturing, sales, distribution, importing and marketing. The attorney general has enforcement authority and need not show that a company intended to create a nuisance or otherwise harm the public.
Invalid Date
More Articles
NSSF sued in 2022, asserting claims under the Commerce Clause, First Amendment and Second Amendment, plus federal preemption under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The district court initially entered a preliminary injunction. In 2023, however, the Third Circuit vacated that injunction and directed dismissal because enforcement against an NSSF member was then too speculative to establish Article III standing. The earlier panel noted that the law had not yet been enforced and credited the state's litigation position that it would not target lawful commerce alone.
The factual record later changed. The September 8 opinion identifies six A1765 enforcement actions against firearm manufacturers and sellers. Those include cases against NSSF members Glock and SIG Sauer, plus actions involving Eagle Shows and JSD Supply, FSS Armory, Point Blank Guns and Ammo, and Butch's Gun World. The court described allegations ranging from out-of-state ghost-gun-kit sales and firearm storage to ammunition sales, Glock pistol conversions and SIG Sauer P320 claims. Those are allegations in separate state proceedings, not findings made by the Third Circuit.
Why standing now exists
NSSF moved in February 2025 to reopen the federal case and file an amended complaint. The district court allowed both, found that NSSF now had standing, then declined to reach the renewed preliminary-injunction motion under Younger v. Harris because New Jersey's Glock enforcement case was pending. The Third Circuit agreed on standing but rejected abstention. Six enforcement cases, including two against identified NSSF members, made the claimed threat concrete rather than conjectural, the panel held.
The panel also treated the four cases against nonmembers as relevant because those businesses are closely related industry participants accused of similar conduct. The opinion said the Point Blank and Butch's complaints included allegedly unreasonable conduct that was not independently unlawful, while the Eagle Shows and JSD Supply allegations concerned conduct in Pennsylvania. For standing purposes, that record supported NSSF's preemption, speech, due-process, commerce and Second Amendment theories enough to permit litigation. It did not establish that any theory will prevail on the merits.
Younger does not block this plaintiff
On abstention, the panel focused on party identity. Under the Third Circuit's test, Younger ordinarily requires an ongoing state judicial proceeding involving the federal plaintiff, potential federal interference, an important state interest and an adequate opportunity to raise federal claims. NSSF is not a party to any of New Jersey's six enforcement actions. A federal ruling could affect Glock's defenses, but the panel said that collateral effect is not the direct interference Younger addresses.
The court rejected New Jersey's argument that NSSF's association with Glock was close enough to treat them as the same party. The recognized exception looks to ownership, control or management, not shared counsel, similar business interests or ordinary association membership. New Jersey did not show that NSSF owns, controls or manages Glock, or the reverse. Only two NSSF members were involved in the listed state cases, while NSSF and its remaining members retained distinct interests in the federal challenge.
The immediate consequence is procedural. NSSF may continue seeking federal review of A1765, while the statute and New Jersey's separate enforcement actions remain in place unless another court order changes their status. The Third Circuit did not rule on NSSF's request for a preliminary injunction, PLCAA preemption, or any constitutional claim. The next milestone is action in the District of New Jersey after the appellate judgment takes effect; the opinion gives no date for a merits ruling or renewed injunction decision.
About the Author
Nick Sawinyh - Nick Sawinyh is a father, husband, hobby farmer, and gun enthusiast from Kentucky. He founded GunsNation and writes most of what appears on this blog.
