Letitia James Desperately Wants A Judge To Believe Body Armor Isn’t Protected By The Second Amendment

Democratic New York Attorney General Letitia James asked a federal judge to throw out a lawsuit challenging the state’s ban on body armor purchases by civilians Monday.

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) sued James in July 2024 on behalf of three New York residents who wished to purchase body armor for personal protection. In documents filed Monday, James argued that the FPC shouldn’t even be allowed involvement in the suit.

“FPC lacks standing because they cannot bring suit vicariously on behalf of their members, and because they cannot demonstrate any injury in their own right,” James said in the memo addressed to the United States District Court for the Western District of New York.

James also argued in the filing that body armor was “dangerous and unusual” and thereby excluded from Second Amendment protection, claiming that those who authored the Constitution weren’t aware of it. James’ argument there ignores the Supreme Court’s 2016 ruling in Caetano v. Massachusetts, which threw out a ban on stun guns.

“While stun guns were not in existence at the end of the 18th century, the same is true for the weapons most commonly used today for self-defense, namely, revolvers and semiautomatic pistols,” Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a concurring opinion. “Revolvers were virtually unknown until well into the 19th century, and semiautomatic pistols were not invented until near the end of that century. Electronic stun guns are no more exempt from the Second Amendment’s protections, simply because they were unknown to the First Congress, than electronic communications are exempt from the First Amendment, or electronic imaging devices are exempt from the Fourth Amendment.”

New York enacted its ban on private ownership of body armor in the aftermath of a May 2022