Ruling Strikes Down NY Body Armor Ban, Prompting Debate Over Public Safety

BUFFALO, N.Y. — A federal judge has struck down New York’s ban on civilians purchasing body armor, ruling the restriction violates the Second Amendment. The law was passed in the wake of the 2022 mass shooting at a Tops supermarket in Buffalo.

The ruling has reignited a debate over Second Amendment rights and public safety, especially in Buffalo, where body armor was worn by Payton Gendron during the shooting. In response, New York passed a law restricting the sale of body armor to most civilians, limiting access to certain professions.

Now, a federal judge has ruled that ban is unconstitutional, finding body armor is protected under the Second Amendment, and Assembly Member Khaleel Anderson explained the judge’s reasoning.

"I think that it's important that the judge determined that body armor is akin to weapons, akin to firearms," said Anderson.

Anderson said the law was intended to prevent another tragedy like the one in Buffalo, arguing that tactical equipment should be restricted to people who need it for their jobs.

"The average citizen doesn't walk around with a bulletproof vest," said Anderson. "It's just not normal. And so we're saying that you shouldn't be able to readily do that, should you not be in one of those professions that know how to adequately use it."

Justin Davis, the director of public affairs at the National Rifle Association, saw the ruling differently, arguing body armor gives people another way to defend themselves without using a weapon.

"To tell people that they can't have armor protection from folks who they’re not taking seriously in the criminal world, to take them off the streets, is absolutely ridiculous," said Davis. "So we're incredibly pleased that the courts are looking at that and saying you have a right to protect yourself."

Paul McQuillen, executive director of Western New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, disagreed with the ruling, questioning whether body armor meets the historical standard the Supreme Court has applied to Second Amendment cases.

"Where is the historical context for body armor in our Constitution? I don't see it," said McQuillen. "I think it was a stretch by Judge Sinatra. Hopefully it'll be overturned in the Court of Appeals."

McQuillen said he believes body armor is difficult to justify as a tool for everyday self-defense. The NRA, meanwhile, argued it can offer protection without requiring someone to use a weapon. The ruling also came as civil litigation continues over the body armor sold to Gendron, where attorney John Elmore is fighting for victims and survivors from the shooting.

"Our litigation against RMA is going to continue," said Elmore. "This wasn't resulting in a dismissal of the lawsuit that we filed against RMA for selling the vest to Gendron, who committed the mass shooting."

Elmore also said decisions about the state’s policy response are up to lawmakers and the attorney general's office.

"When it comes to policy, I trust that our governor and our attorney general and our legislature and the Assembly will come up with the proper remedies,” said Elmore.

A judge temporarily paused the ruling to give New York time to consider its next move, while the attorney general's office has been reviewing the decision.

"I hope that our state appeals, and that those families that lost ten people can understand that we as a state are fighting to make sure that never happens again," said Anderson.

The next step now rests with the state, which has until Nov. 4 to appeal the ruling, or the state can pursue another approach to restricting access to body armor.