The National Rifle Associations litigation arm announced that it has joined a coalition lawsuit challenging New Jerseys categorical ban on firearm suppressors, contending the prohibition cannot survive the text-and-history standard set out in the U.S. Supreme Courts 2022 Bruen decision. In social posts on July 21, 2025, NRA-ILA Litigation Counsel Joseph Greenlee described the case as a strong vehicle to test state-level restrictions on widely owned arms accessories that reduce muzzle blast and help protect shooter hearing. New Jersey law currently bars civilians from possessing suppressors, even though the devices are regulated under federal law and legal in most U.S. states with varying permitting requirements. Plaintiffs argue that suppressors are in common lawful use for hearing protection, recoil mitigation, and training safety, and therefore qualify as protected "arms" or arms accessories central to the Second Amendments core purposes. The suit further asserts that broad bans invite over-criminalization of peaceable gun owners who travel between states, and that less restrictive alternativesregistration, background checks, or range-use limitationscould address public concerns without an outright prohibition. Greenlee indicated confidence that the historical analogues New Jersey will likely citesuch as early 20th-century poaching controlsbear little resemblance to modern blanket bans. A successful challenge could reverberate beyond the Garden State, encouraging litigation in the handful of remaining suppressor-prohibition jurisdictions. For trainers, hunters, and competitive shooters, wider access to suppressors is often framed as an occupational health issue that can reduce cumulative hearing loss, especially where indoor and high-round-count shooting is common. The case will proceed in federal court; timelines for motions and briefing will determine when substantive rulings arrive. Gun owners in restrictive states should monitor developments closely, as suppressor access has become a frontline battleground in post-Bruen Second Amendment litigation.