The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and New Jersey Firearms Owners Syndicate (NJFOS) have expanded a civil rights lawsuit, originally filed last November on behalf of New Jersey resident Elsid Aliaj, contesting the confiscation of his legally-owned firearms and ammunition, to now include two additional plaintiffs.
Joining the lawsuit are Garden State residents Martin Hroncich and Luis Rene De La Cruz Franco.
It is a case with considerable implications, as the outcome could significantly change how prosecutors and police handle situations involving law-abiding gun owners who happen to live with someone who may be prohibited from owning firearms. Beyond that, specifically in Aliaj’s case, it raises questions about conversing with someone to whom English may be a second language, and recognizing the emotional swings related to pregnancy.
According to the original complaint from last Nov. 3, the Fort Lee Police Department, “based on a report from the Englewood Police Department (“EPD”) that Aliaj’s wife (hereinafter referred to as “L.A.”) had been involuntarily admitted to New Bridge Medical Center for a mental health evaluation (in what turned out to be a language-related misunderstanding, resulting in L.A.’s discharge with a diagnosis of “Adjustment disorder with depressed mood Seven weeks pregnant”)—confiscated Aliaj’s firearms, ammunition, and related accessories from his home.” This happened on April 17, 2025.
At the time the original lawsuit was filed, the following November, authorities were still unwilling to return Aliaj’s firearms, “even though Aliaj is not under any legal, mental, or physical disability that would disqualify him from exercising his fundamental right to keep and bear arms.”
Leap ahead six months. By now, the Aliaj case has gotten some attention and other people, according to a source close to the case, have come forward with similar allegations. Two such people are Hroncich and De La Cruz.
“Bergen County’s very clear policy is: If you live with a prohibited person, or even someone suspected of being prohibited, your rights can be taken away,” said SAF Senior Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack, in a SAF release announcing the expanded case. “This took the form of permit denials and revocations, and outright gun confiscations. What we learned after filing this case on behalf of Mr. Aliaj is that the constitutional abuse he suffered was all too common in Bergen County. Additional individuals, including new plaintiffs Mr. Hroncich and Mr. De La Cruz, started coming out of the woodwork. Each had a similar story: their rights under the Second Amendment were taken from them purely as the result of concerns Bergen County officials had about loved ones of theirs.”
Sack also confirmed to Ammoland News that SAF and NJFOS are financially supporting the case, while not participating as plaintiffs. Aliaj is a SAF member.
The amended complaint was filed on June 1 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Newark Vicinage. Defendants are the Bergen County Prosecutor’s office, Prosecutor Mark Musella, along with the Borough of Fort Lee, the Borough of Paramus, and the Township of Rochelle Park.
Plaintiffs are represented by attorney Edward Andrew Paltzik with Taylor Dykema in Houston, Texas.
As alleged in the amended complaint, “…Defendants have adopted, implemented, enforced, and maintained a series of related policies that together deprive individuals, including plaintiffs, under County Defendants’ jurisdiction, from exercising their fundamental rights under the Second Amendment, not premised upon any allegation that Plaintiffs themselves are prohibited, but rather by association with a cohabitant who is so prohibited or otherwise disqualified, or by association with a cohabitant who County Defendants perceive to be so prohibited or otherwise disqualified.”
According to SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, the situation in Bergen County, while alarming, is not unique.
“Cases like this confirm what we hear from SAF members in gun-grabbing states like New Jersey all the time: local officials do what they want, when they want, without any respect for the law or the Constitution,” Gottlieb said in a prepared statement.
Sack, in a telephone conversation with Ammoland News, pointed to language in the amended Aliaj complaint, which states, “County Defendants have adopted, implemented, enforced, and maintained a series of related policies that together deprive individuals, including Plaintiffs, under County Defendants’ jurisdiction, from exercising their fundamental rights under the Second Amendment, not premised upon any allegation that Plaintiffs themselves are prohibited, but rather by association with a cohabitant who is so prohibited or otherwise disqualified, or by association with a cohabitant who County Defendants perceive to be so prohibited or otherwise disqualified.”
That’s not all. The amended complaint further alleges:
- These Challenged Policies include at least the following: (a) Confiscation of firearms, ammunition, and related accessories based solely on one or more Cohabitant Disqualifications1 (the “Confiscation Policy”); (b) Compelled sales of firearms, ammunition, and related accessories based solely on one or more Cohabitant Disqualifications (the “Compelled Sale Policy”); (c) Revocation of Firearms Purchaser Identification Card (“FPIC”) or other firearms licenses or permits validly issued under the laws of New Jersey based solely on one or more Cohabitant Disqualifications (the “Revocation Policy”); (d) Denial of applications for FPICs or other firearms licenses or permits that would otherwise be validly issued under the laws of New Jersey based solely on one or more Cohabitant Disqualifications (the “Denial Policy”); and (e) Compelled production of cohabitant medical records based solely on one or more Cohabitant Disqualifications (the “Compelled Production Policy”).
- County Defendants routinely and illegally cite, invoke, or rely on the Duty to Warn Statute, the ERPO Act, or the Issuance Disqualifiers to disarm law-abiding firearms owners when the individual who is subject to disqualification is not the firearms owner, but rather, the owner’s cohabitant.
- County Defendants also routinely and lawlessly enforce the Challenged Policies based on nothing more than “the State’s concerns,” which are not codified in any law.
The amended complaint quotes “Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office Law Enforcement Directive No. 2019-2” which states, in part:
“Under this Directive, whenever a Bergen County law enforcement agency receives information or a warning related to a threat of imminent, serious physical violence to self or others made by an individual suspected of suffering from a mental illness, whether that information comes from a mental health provider or any other source, the respective police department must ascertain whether the individual has been issued a firearms purchaser identification card (“FPIC”), any permit to purchase or possess a firearm, or whether the patient may possess or have access to any firearm . . . .
“Additionally, if the respective law enforcement agency determines that the individual possess a FPIC or permit to purchase or possess a firearm, or possesses or has access to a firearm, the law enforcement agency must attempt to secure the identification card, permit, and/or firearms either consensually or with a warrant if consent is denied, on the basis of the imminent threat of serious harm.”
The 35-page amended complaint demands a jury trial.
ATF Director Cekada Talks Gun Rights, Rule Rollbacks & Reform with Shermichael Singleton
About Dave Workman
Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.
A mugger says, “your money or your life”.
The Prosecutor says, “your guns or your Wife”
There is a Henny Youngman joke in there somewhere.