New York Attorney General Letitia James requested a federal judge on Monday to dismiss a lawsuit that contests the state’s prohibition on civilians purchasing body armor.
The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) initiated the lawsuit after James assumed office in July 2024. They represent three New Yorkers looking to acquire body armor for personal safety. In the documents submitted on Monday, James contended that FPC shouldn’t be involved in the lawsuit at all.
“FPC lacks standing because it cannot sue on behalf of its members and cannot prove damages in its own right,” James stated in a memo to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.
In her filing, James also asserted that bulletproof vests fall outside the protections granted by the Second Amendment, describing them as “dangerous and unusual.” This argument overlooks the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in the case of Caetano vs. Massachusetts, which addressed bans on stun guns.
Justice Samuel Alito noted in his concurring opinion that similar reasoning applies to other weapons that were absent at the time the Constitution was framed. “Just as electronic communications aren’t exempt from the First Amendment simply because they were unknown to the First Congress, electronic stun guns shouldn’t be excluded from Second Amendment protection,” he wrote.
New York introduced its ban on personal ownership of bulletproof vests following the mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo in May 2022, which resulted in ten fatalities.
The state argues that modern body armor is not a “weapon” nor “armor” under the Second Amendment, positioning it as a “tactical accessory” not primarily used for self-defense and claiming it poses a unique danger to public safety.
James elaborated by stating, “Modern ballistic body armor, a tactical asset initially designed for the battlefield, is extraordinarily dangerous as it undermines the foundational belief that ‘good guys with guns’ can thwart ‘bad guys with guns.’ This alters the balance in armed confrontations, turning the wearer from an at-risk participant into a heightened threat.”
She pointed out that the alarming rise in the use of tactical gear by mass shooters over the last two decades underscores this claim.
The NRA reacted strongly to James’ depiction of body armor, arguing that it infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens. “Attorney General Letitia James wants to communicate that citizens shouldn’t feel entitled to protect themselves with body armor. The Second Amendment isn’t limited to firearms; it encompasses the fundamental right to self-defense,” the NRA remarked. They emphasized that bulletproof vests save lives, providing individuals a chance to defend against violent criminals.
The Supreme Court’s June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen invalidated New York’s concealed carry permit law on Second Amendment grounds. FPC Chairman Brandon Combs referenced this case among others as he critiqued James’ response to their motion regarding the body armor ban.
“Letitia James’s notably poor response to our challenge of New York City’s unconstitutional body armor ban highlights her desperation,” Combs stated. “They attempted to misrepresent a flawed argument as a strong one, but it failed miserably—consistent with a state that seems determined to continue its losing streak on Second Amendment issues.”
“We are eager to lift this ban, whatever it might take. Expect further developments in this crucial case aimed at protecting the right to defensive weapons and armor,” he added.
