By Hank Russell
A trade group that promotes and protects the recreational use of firearms for hunting and sport shooting lost an appellate decision against the state attorney general’s office on July 10 over the state’s public nuisance law involving guns.
In the case of NSSF v. James, NSSFⓇ (National Shooting Sport Foundation, Inc.), The Firearm Industry Trade Association challenged Section 898 of the state’s General Business Law, which is a public nuisance statute addressing the issue of guns. The organization said that section of the state law is unconstitutional because it is preempted by the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which absolves gun manufacturers, sellers and distributors of any liability if the gun that was purchased was used in a crime.
The NSSF’s complaint further alleged that Section 898 violated both the Commerce Clause and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In December 2021, the organization filed a challenge to Section 898 and the state sought to dismiss the case. In May 2022, the district court ruled in favor of James, stating that Section 898 was constitutional and did not preempt the PLCAA. The NSFF filed an appeal.
On July 10, 2025, Judge Dennis Jacobs of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against NSSF. The Second Circuit ruling held that, on its face, New York’s law falls within PLCAA’s predicate exception and thus is not preempted by federal law, does not exceed the state’s authority to regulate interstate commerce and is not void for vagueness. New York’s public nuisance statute imposes liability for firearm industry members who know or recklessly endanger the safety or health of the public through the sale or marketing of firearms.
“This decision is a massive victory for public safety and the rule of law and will help us continue to fight the scourge of gun violence to keep our communities safe,” James said. “New York’s gun safety laws are among the toughest in the nation, and my office will always defend and enforce those laws to protect all New Yorkers.”
The NSSF noted that, while Jacobs admitted that Section 898 “is nothing short of an attempt to end-run PLCAA,” he was “constrained to agree with my colleagues that, depending on the pleading, this statute could be applied consistent with PLCAA and the Constitution; and under Circuit precedent, that suffices to defeat Appellants’ facial challenge.”
The organization announced that it is exploring all legal options.
The Second Circuit’s decision is disappointing. We respectfully disagree with the court’s reasoning to uphold New York’s law. We earnestly believe this law is exactly what Congress had in mind when it passed PLCAA with a bipartisan majority,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “The PLCAA is designed to prohibit frivolous lawsuits against members of the firearm industry, and we continue to believe the New York statute is intended to evade the will of Congress.”
Keane said the PLCAA “codifies common law and common-sense principles to prevent baseless litigation from bankrupting an entire industry, especially one that provides the necessary means for the lawful exercise of the Second Amendment.”