A federal judge in Buffalo struck down New York's ban on the purchase and sale of body armor on Wednesday, ruling that the first-of-its-kind law violates the Second Amendment because body armor is an “Arm” protected by the Constitution, according to the decision in Heeter v. James, quoted at length by Reason's Volokh Conspiracy.
U.S. District Judge John L. Sinatra Jr. of the Western District of New York granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs — New York residents Benjamin Heeter and Joseph Wurtenberg and the Firearms Policy Coalition — in a 47-page decision, and permanently enjoined the state from enforcing the ban. He stayed the injunction for 14 days, keeping the law in effect while New York decides whether to seek relief from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Law Commentary reported.
Armor is an “Arm,” the court held
The decision rests on the Supreme Court's framework in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022): first the constitutional text, then history. Quoting founding-era dictionaries relied on in Heller — including Samuel Johnson's 1773 definition of “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence” — the court held that the word “arms” included armor when the Second Amendment was ratified, so the burden shifted to New York to show its ban fits the nation's historical tradition of arms regulation. In the court's words, New York failed that test.
The judge rejected the state's argument that founding-era armor had become rare and ineffective, writing that the argument “runs headlong into the definitions adopted by Heller,” and also rejected New York's claim that recent Supreme Court limits on universal injunctions prevented statewide relief.
A law written after the Buffalo supermarket attack
New York enacted the restrictions in 2022, weeks after a gunman wearing body armor killed 10 people and injured three others at a Tops supermarket in Buffalo. The law limited purchases to people in designated professions, including law enforcement and certain security occupations, and made it a crime for other residents to buy or take possession of body armor and for businesses to sell it to them. The restrictions covered bulletproof vests, ballistic plates and other protective clothing designed to stop gunfire, Law Commentary reported.
The Firearms Policy Coalition, which sued in July 2024 alongside Heeter and Wurtenberg, called the ruling a first-in-history federal Second Amendment judgment striking down a general ban on purchasing defensive body armor. The defendants, sued in their official capacities, include Attorney General Letitia James. Whether the state will appeal was not announced in the reports reviewed.
The ban technically remains in force during the 14-day stay. If New York does not win further relief on appeal, the permanent injunction will bar the state from enforcing the purchase and sale restrictions challenged in Heeter v. James.
What is solid
- Judge Sinatra ruled on October 21 that New York's body armor ban violates the Second Amendment and permanently enjoined its enforcement — the decision text, via Reason, and Law Commentary.
- The injunction is stayed for 14 days for the state to seek appellate relief — Law Commentary and the decision.
- New York enacted the restrictions in 2022 after the Buffalo Tops supermarket attack, limiting purchases to designated professions — Law Commentary.
What is only claimed
- The Firearms Policy Coalition — a plaintiff in the case — calls the ruling a historic first; that characterisation is the plaintiffs' own.
- The state had argued armor was rare and ineffective in the founding era and that statewide relief was improper; the court rejected both arguments. An appeal had not been announced in the reports reviewed.