New Jersey Court Says Out-of-State Carry Permits Don’t Have to be Recognized

The Second Amendment is the only constitutionally protected right that stops at the border of the state where you live. In Virginia, where I live, I don’t need a government-issued permission slip to keep a gun in my home or in my glove box,  but if I drive across the border into Maryland without first unloading and securing that handgun, I can be charged with a crime. 

Even if I possess a valid carry Virginia carry license, states don’t have to recognize it. That’s the case in New Jersey, where no permits other than those issued by licensing authorities in the Garden State are accepted. Now an state appeals court has ruled that restriction is just fine, and a Pennsylvania woman can be charged for illegal gun possession even though she had a valid concealed carry permit from her home state when she was stopped for speeding. 

Jeludy Tavarez-Rodriguez raised both a Second Amendment challenge to her arrest and conviction and argued that New Jersey’s refusal to recognize out-of-state permits violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution. In a per curium opinion issued on Monday, a three-judge panel disagreed with both arguments, declaring that “because the licensing requirements vary between the two states, both New Jersey and Pennsylvania are permitted to set their own qualifications as they see fit, so long as they remain within constitutional parameters.”

The panel was similarly dismissive of her claim that New Jersey’s refusal to recognize out-of-state permits violates her right to keep and bear arms.

 Permission given to the public to carry handguns has long been “the most closely-regulated aspect of” New Jersey’s firearms statutes. As early as 1882, New Jersey has regulated the carrying of handguns, and since 1905, it has required private citizens to obtain a permit before carrying firearms in public.

“Permission given to the public to carry handguns” isn’t how I’d describe a fundamental constitutional right, but then, New Jersey’s courts have routinely dismissed or downgraded the Second Amendment, so I’m not shocked to see the appellate court essentially describe it as a privilege, not a right. 

The regulatory and administrative requirements to secure permission tocarry a handgun in New Jersey are robust. Applicants must follow a two-step process. First, the applicant must apply to the relevant law enforcement official—the chief police officer in the municipality, or, in some instances, the Superintendent of the State Police. In addition to the application, a potential licensee must secure the endorsement of at least four reputable nonrelative persons who have known the applicant for at least three years before the application and “who shall certify . . . that the applicant is a person of good moral character and behavior.” 

… We are not persuaded by defendant’s argument that her prosecution was constitutionally infirm. Despite her argument to the contrary, Bruen only permits the possession of a weapon—subject to an individual state’s licensing requirements—that ensures “that those bearing arms in the jurisdiction are . . .’law-abiding, responsible citizens.'” Defendant failed to comply with New Jersey’s firearm statutes, regulations, and mandate regarding the proper substance and procedure to carry a weapon in this State. Since defendant failed to follow those requirements, her prosecution is constitutional.

I believe that many of New Jersey’s licensing requirements, including its multiple character references, are unconstitutional on their own, but the state’s judiciary has upheld those restrictions, which leaves Tavarez-Rodriguez in a bind. Theoretically, it’s possible for a non-resident to get a New Jersey carry permit, though it may not be practical or easy to do so. Tavarez-Rodriguez had never tried to obtain a New Jersey carry permit, though it’s unclear whether that would have made a difference to the appellate court. 

Today’s decision is hardly shocking, given how much hostility New Jersey politicians and judges have historically shown to the Second Amendment. It is, however, another reminder of why we need to pass a national right-to-carry reciprocity law to help guarantee that our Second Amendment rights do extend beyond the borders of our home state. 

Editor’s Note: Radical leftist judges are doing everything they can to hamstring our Second Amendment rights.

Help us hold these corrupt judges accountable for their unconstitutional rulings. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.