Federal litigation challenging New Jersey's ban on carrying hollow-point ammunition in public cleared a key procedural hurdle last week when plaintiffs filed a reply brief that spotlights what they describe as a glaring contradiction in the state's legal position: New Jersey argues in court that hollow-point rounds are unusually dangerous, while statewide law enforcement policy requires that police officers carry exactly those rounds, Bearing Arms reported on May 10.

The case is Bergmann-Schoch v. Platkin, pending before the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Plaintiffs include the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, and named plaintiff Heidi Bergmann-Schoch, a New Jersey gun owner and firearm instructor. They are challenging N.J.S.A. § 2C:39-3(f)(1), a 1978 statute that bars civilians from transporting or carrying hollow-point ammunition in public. As AmmoLand News reported when the case advanced in March, the plaintiffs argue the ban disarms ordinary gun owners of the ammunition self-defense and law enforcement professionals consider optimal for defensive use — specifically because hollow points stop after entering a target rather than over-penetrating and endangering bystanders.

Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment in March 2026. New Jersey cross-moved against them. By May 7, plaintiffs filed their combined opposition to the state's cross-motion and their reply in support of their own motion. New Jersey's reply is due May 28, 2026, according to the case schedule.

In their brief, plaintiffs characterized New Jersey's arguments as ranging from "flatly incorrect, to self-contradictory, to histrionic," per Bearing Arms. The catch-22 is difficult for the state to paper over: the same sovereign that tells courts hollow-point ammunition is too dangerous for civilians mandates that its own police officers carry those rounds. Under the Bruen standard, the government must demonstrate a historical tradition of analogous regulation to sustain a modern firearms restriction. Gun-rights litigants have argued that 1978-era ammunition bans have no such tradition supporting them.

A favorable district court ruling for the plaintiffs would not end the fight — New Jersey would almost certainly appeal to the Third Circuit — but it would add to the body of post-Bruen precedent limiting states' ability to restrict ammunition types in common defensive use. Gun Owners Foundation has flagged the case as a priority litigation effort. The district court has set no ruling date.