New Jersey Supreme Court To Hear Concealed Carry Case

New Jersey Supreme Court to Hear Nappen Law Firm’s Legal Challenge to New Jersey Carry Permit Law.

Second Amendment Courts Judges Strict Scrutiny
New Jersey Supreme Court To Hear Concealed Carry Case

New Jersey – -( On March 21, 2019, the New Jersey Supreme Court granted certification of a carry permit appeal In Re Application for Permit to Carry a Handgun of Calvin Carlstrom, which raises three important issues:

1. Does New Jersey’s “justifiable need” standard for issuance of a permit to carry a handgun constitute an unconstitutional deprivation of a fundamental, individual right, generally and as applied to petitioner?

2. Does N.J.S. 2C:58-4.d. violate separation of powers under N.J. CONST. Art. III, § 1 and U.S. CONST. Amends. V and XIV by mandating that the judiciary perform an executive function?

3. Is Due Process and fundamental fairness denied when one is not afforded a hearing on a firearms licensing application?

Petitioner Calvin Carlstrom is a security guard primarily hired to protect movie theaters. His duties include the protection of life and property. Carlstrom’s local police chief approved Carlstrom’s carry permit application, but the Union County Superior Court denied the application without a hearing.

After the New Jersey Appellate Division upheld the trial court’s decision, Carlstrom petitioned the New Jersey Supreme Court to review his case.

Carlstrom is a well-qualified and trained professional. He is an honorably-discharged/retired U.S. Marine and SORA card-holder. He is NRA-qualified in comprehensive pistol use, certified in “Low Light/No Light Level 1” ballistics, and trained in “Active Shooter” scenarios.

Carlstrom is represented by the law firm of Evan F. Nappen Attorney at Law, PC. The Appellate Division appeal and Supreme Court petition were filed by Louis P. Nappen, Esq. of the Firm.
A GoGetFunding account has been set up to help fund Mr. Carlstrom’s legal challenge. If you would like to contribute, please go to:

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gene L.

Well I believe these guys have a better case, but a win is a win doesn’t matter who


You people who live in N J need to stand together and vote that SCUM out of office.I could not live in a place that was taking MY freedoms away from me.The Dems have changed ,they are no longer the party of our ancestors,the DEMS just want to control you.It is not just the 2nd amendment it is every aspect of you life.You dont think so just look around op
en your eyes and the changes in the last 50 years.N J is beautiful ,the politicians aren’t they just keep on taking.
VOTE THEM OUT.or carry them out


If the state owns us, no it is not unconstitutional as if you are a child or owned adult the owner gets to decide what you will be allowed. If you are free then yes it is unconstitutional. These people supporting and proposing such laws obviously think they own us. Are we willing to tell them they do not?.

Mr. Bill

No allowing a trained individual like this to be armed makes it look a lot like the state of New Jersey has a vested interest in there being another mass shooting at a movie theater to support their disarmament of law abiding citizens.


If we TRUELY believe that all of the rights in the Bill of Rights are God given ( or natural) then we must not allow government _servants __ to limit (infringe) any of them.


You all understand that this is a state that requires a visit to the local cops and issuance of a “Permit to Purchase” a BB GUN???

NJ and NY both need to be smacked into 2A compliance. Been going on too long. Chicago got smacked. What’s the problem?

John A Jameson

New Jersey is run by a rabid socialist regime that modifies the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by whimsy and political misrepresentation. As long as the governor and his socialist cronies are allowed to do so, is the next step martial law and house to house searches?

Fourteen werds

New Jersey is run by (((globalist))) zionists. Aka the juice… and Zionist Christians.


This is what is taking place all over America, servants are dictating requirements necessary for the exercise of Rights of the Sovereign. The Sovereign have allowed, (either by blind approval or silence, seeking a false safety over liberty), requirememts placed upon themselves to expound needs prior to exercising fundamental Rights; Rights mind you not granted by servants. Servants may attach burdens upon privileges granted, not Rights! As Our Founders so well knew, when the branches of government conspire to confuse Rights as privileges granted, tyranny results, which demands a call to action by the Sovereign to defeat such unconstitutional behavior,… Read more »


3am Military Tribunal on their front lawn. Drag them out of bed in the wee hours to answer for their TREASON. These dirtbags will learn soon enough.


Elected Servants need to be reminded, that government is not delegated, the power to “PERMIT”, or Charge a “Fee” for, or “Tax” any law abiding citizen to exercise any Constitutional right. Why should good people have their rights held hostage because of governments inept ability to control criminals?


Good luck in the People’s Republic of New Jersey.


Nothing will happen as usual this is the S-Hole of the world poliiticans violate constitutional rights every day .The NRA has given up on us years ago . Another magazine limit shoved at us ,Attorney general threatening all gun vendors,no concealed carry, months of waiting for a handgun it goes on and on. The worst state in the union besides NY.


I contend that Hawaii is The Worst state when it comes to concealed carry “permits”: I believe that right now nobody has one in the entire state, in other years less than five permits (at most) are issued.

Abdullah Shakir

I wish I had a gun right now


You don’t??

Brian's Winters

No is the only state where few is defacto illegal. The standard is insurmountable.

Green Mtn. Boy

“Does New Jersey’s “justifiable need” standard for issuance of a permit to carry a handgun constitute an unconstitutional deprivation of a fundamental, individual right, generally and as applied to petitioner?”

Well Duh !


for 1 & 3, absolutely. 2? US 2A does not specify “needs” – why should Nj const. supercede it?


The supremacy clause should protect us, but the supremes always overlook it


They can have tribunals, also, you know.