nra-nj-2nd-amendment-gun.JPG

The New Jersey Attorney General has filed a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear a Sussex County man's lawsuit against the Garden State's handgun-carry laws - a month after the NRA and 19 states announced they were supporting the litigation.

(George Frey/Getty)

The New Jersey Attorney General has filed a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear a challenge to New Jersey’s handgun-carry restrictions.

The brief, filed Friday, asks the nation’s highest court to dismiss the arguments of John Drake, a Sussex County business owner who says he needs to be armed because he carries large amounts of cash for his ATM business.

The state’s gun laws are “a careful grid of regulatory provisions” that only allow carry permits when there is “special danger to the applicant’s life,” wrote John J. Hoffman, the attorney general.

“New Jersey’s Legislature, long ago, made the predictive judgment that widespread carrying of handguns in public would not be consistent with public safety because of the inherent danger it poses,” Hoffman wrote, citing laws as early as the 1790s in restricting firearms in the Garden State.

The attorney general’s brief comes a month after the NRA and 19 states, led by Wyoming, announced they would file paperwork supporting the plaintiff.

Drake, of Fredon, said today the top court should take the case – because the Bill of Rights is being “abridged.”

“Our Constitution and Bill of Rights were well written and they are easy to understand,” said Drake. “They were meant to be applied equally to every citizen of every state of the United States.”

The Wyoming governor said the states were weighing in because the most recent decision on Drake’s case – the Third-Circuit Court of Appeals decision last year to dismiss the lawsuit – could impact states that have more-permissive laws concerning gun ownership.

“If the current decision stands, states providing greater protections than New Jersey under the Second Amendment may be preempted by future federal action,” Mead said in his statement. “That is the importance of this case.”

However, New Jersey’s top law official told the top court that the state’s regulations were put in place in the interest of greater public safety in New Jersey – and don’t take away Second-Amendment rights.

“The justifiable need standard in New Jersey’s Handgun Permit Law qualifies as a presumptively lawful, longstanding regulation that does not burden conduct within the scope of the Second Amendment’s guarantee,” wrote Hoffman.

A spokesman for Hoffman declined further comment today. The U.S. Supreme Court is still considering whether to hear the case.

RELATED COVERAGE

• First the NRA, now 19 states: Sussex County man's gun-carry lawsuit goes national

• NRA gets behind NJ man's lawsuit challenging state's gun carry restrictions, group says