On Monday, July 15, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction in Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association v. Delaware Department of Safety & Homeland Security, NRA-ILA’s lawsuit challenging Delaware’s ban on “assault weapons” and magazines that hold more than 17 rounds.
The Third Circuit emphasized that a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary form of relief that should not be entered lightly. The court explained that the two most important factors are (1) the plaintiffs’ likelihood of success on the merits and (2) whether the plaintiffs will be irreparably harmed absent preliminary relief. But breaking with other federal circuit courts, the Third Circuit held that the deprivation of a constitutional right alone does not constitute irreparable harm. Consequently, the Third Circuit determined that the district court properly denied the injunction.
The Third Circuit expressed no view on the merits of the case or the plaintiffs’ likelihood of success as the case proceeds.
Judge Roth concurred with the judgment of the court but wrote separately to explain why she believes the plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the merits. She argued that, for a weapon to be protected under the Second Amendment, it must be (1) widely possessed, (2) commonly employed for self-defense, and (3) not most useful in military service. Because she believes that “assault weapons” and “large-capacity magazines” are most useful in military service—even if they are widely owned for lawful purposes including self-defense—they are not protected “Arms.” Judge Roth’s concurrence does not affect the outcome of the case.
The case will now return to the District Court for the District of Delaware, which will decide the case on the merits.
Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org for future updates on NRA-ILA’s ongoing efforts to defend your constitutional rights.
More Like This From Around The NRA
