In a new legal battle, New Jersey’s strict gun regulations have once again come under fire, this time with a direct challenge to the state’s “one gun a month” law. The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), a pro-gun rights organization, has filed a federal complaint aimed at dismantling what they call an unconstitutional restriction. As Dana DiFilippo of the New Jersey Monitor reported, this case brings New Jersey’s laws into the national spotlight following a string of successful legal challenges against similar regulations.
The Law in Question: One Gun a Month

New Jersey’s “one gun a month” law, also known as an OGM (One Gun a Month) ban, restricts individuals from purchasing more than one firearm within a 30-day period. The law, enacted in 2009, was designed to prevent straw purchases and illegal gun trafficking. However, critics argue that the law unfairly infringes upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens by limiting how often they can legally purchase firearms.
In recent years, this law has increasingly come under scrutiny, especially following the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Bruen, which established that any restrictions on gun rights must be rooted in the nation’s “historical tradition” of firearm regulation. William Kirk, of Washington Gun Law, explains in his breakdown that the FPC’s latest lawsuit seeks to challenge New Jersey’s OGM ban under the same reasoning that struck down a similar law in California.
Firearms Policy Coalition Takes Action

The Firearms Policy Coalition, emboldened by its recent victories in court, has now turned its attention to New Jersey. FPC President Brandon Combs described the coalition’s mission as creating a “world of maximal liberty,” pushing to overturn what they see as immoral and unconstitutional laws. Their lawsuit, titled Struck v. Platkin, was filed on behalf of New Jersey residents Matthew Struck and Daniel Francisco, who argue that the state’s gun purchasing limits violate their Second Amendment rights.
Kirk notes that the FPC is riding a wave of momentum, having successfully challenged similar laws in other states, most notably California. The organization’s strategy is clear: leverage recent legal precedents, such as the Bruen decision, to force courts to recognize that these laws lack historical backing and therefore cannot stand.
The Legal Argument: No Historical Precedent

The complaint, filed by attorney Bradley P. Lehman, lays out a straightforward legal argument. According to Lehman, the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to “keep and bear Arms” without limiting the number of firearms an individual can purchase. The lawsuit argues that New Jersey’s OGM ban has no basis in the nation’s historical firearm regulations, as the first such law didn’t appear until 1975—long after the ratification of the Second Amendment.
Dana DiFilippo of the New Jersey Monitor emphasizes this point, explaining that Lehman’s argument hinges on the idea that if a gun regulation wasn’t in place during the nation’s founding or isn’t part of a long-standing tradition, it cannot be upheld under the Second Amendment. This strategy follows the same reasoning used in California’s case, where a federal judge recently struck down their version of the OGM law.
How the Law Affects Gun Owners

For New Jersey gun owners like Struck and Francisco, the OGM ban represents a significant restriction. Under current law, purchasing more than one handgun within a 30-day period is not only prohibited but can also lead to criminal charges. The plaintiffs argue that this law violates their fundamental right to bear arms, especially since the Constitution makes no mention of limiting the number of guns one can buy in any timeframe.
As Kirk points out, New Jersey is likely to defend the law by arguing that it doesn’t restrict the ownership or possession of firearms, but rather regulates the purchase process. However, as Lehman’s complaint stresses, any regulation that impedes the lawful acquisition of firearms—even if it’s a limitation on frequency – should be viewed as an infringement of Second Amendment rights.
The Broader Legal Landscape

Since the landmark Bruen ruling, states with strict gun control laws have faced a wave of legal challenges. DiFilippo explains that New Jersey, known for having some of the toughest gun laws in the country, has been a frequent target for lawsuits aimed at dismantling various firearm restrictions. From assault weapons bans to prohibitions on carrying guns in sensitive places, gun-rights advocates have been chipping away at the state’s legal framework.
In this context, the challenge to New Jersey’s OGM ban is just the latest in a series of lawsuits. FPC’s Brandon Combs has made it clear that their goal is to force every state, not just New Jersey, to adhere strictly to the Second Amendment’s protections as interpreted in recent court rulings.
Similarities to California’s Case

The success of the lawsuit against California’s one-gun-a-month law provides a strong precedent for the New Jersey case. As Kirk explains, the California law was deemed unconstitutional because it could not be justified under the Bruen decision’s requirement for historical precedent. The legal team behind the New Jersey challenge is banking on a similar outcome.
Lehman’s complaint specifically references the California ruling, using it as a template to demonstrate that New Jersey’s law is equally flawed. The complaint argues that just as the California law failed to meet constitutional standards, so too will New Jersey’s once it is subjected to the same scrutiny.
New Jersey’s Defense Strategy

New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin and Col. Patrick Callahan, superintendent of the New Jersey State Police, are named as defendants in the lawsuit. While the state has not yet publicly commented on the case, it’s expected that they will mount a defense centered on the argument that the law is a necessary tool to prevent gun trafficking and illegal firearm sales.
However, as DiFilippo notes, the state will also need to grapple with the fact that similar arguments failed in California. If New Jersey cannot provide a convincing historical justification for the OGM law, the court may find itself compelled to rule against it.
Potential Outcomes

If the federal court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the decision could have far-reaching implications not only for New Jersey but for other states with similar laws. Kirk points out that this lawsuit could set the stage for additional challenges to gun purchasing restrictions across the country.
A victory for the FPC in New Jersey would likely embolden other gun-rights groups to pursue similar cases, further chipping away at state-level gun regulations that don’t align with the Bruen framework.
The National Context

As gun control advocates push for tighter restrictions in response to rising gun violence, legal challenges like Struck v. Platkin highlight the deep divisions in how Americans view the Second Amendment. Proponents of the OGM law argue that limiting the frequency of gun purchases is a common-sense measure to prevent stockpiling and trafficking, while opponents see it as an unjustifiable restriction on personal freedom.
The debate is emblematic of the larger struggle over gun rights in the United States, where every new legal ruling sets a precedent that could either tighten or loosen restrictions across the country.
The Path Forward

With the lawsuit now in motion, it remains to be seen how the courts will rule. One thing is clear, though: the FPC is not backing down. Whether or not they succeed in overturning New Jersey’s OGM law, their efforts are part of a broader strategy to dismantle gun regulations nationwide.
As DiFilippo reports, the outcome of this case could pave the way for future legal battles, and both sides are watching closely. New Jersey’s gun laws, long considered some of the strictest in the country, may soon face significant changes depending on the ruling in this pivotal case.
The Future of Gun Regulations

The challenge to New Jersey’s “one gun a month” law is yet another chapter in the ongoing battle over Second Amendment rights in America. With the Firearms Policy Coalition leading the charge, and recent legal precedents offering hope to gun-rights advocates, the future of New Jersey’s gun regulations now hangs in the balance. Whether this law will survive or be struck down as unconstitutional remains to be seen, but the case will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for gun control efforts nationwide.

Ed spent his childhood in the backwoods of Maine, where harsh winters taught him the value of survival skills. With a background in bushcraft and off-grid living, Ed has honed his expertise in fire-making, hunting, and wild foraging. He writes from personal experience, sharing practical tips and hands-on techniques to thrive in any outdoor environment. Whether it’s primitive camping or full-scale survival, Ed’s advice is grounded in real-life challenges.