Federal Judge Strikes Down New York's Body Armor Sales Ban
Ruling Paused 14 DaysHeeter v. James · U.S. District Court, W.D.N.Y. · Oct 21, 2026
Is body armor an "arm" protected by the Second Amendment?
What a ruling could mean
- If the ruling takes effect after the 14-day pause: New York could no longer enforce its ban on selling or buying body armor to people outside eligible professions.
- If New York appeals and gets the ruling paused or reversed: The sales ban stays enforceable while the appeal plays out.
What happened
Judge John L. Sinatra Jr. held that body armor is covered by the Second Amendment's plain text and that New York failed to show a historical tradition supporting its ban on selling or buying body armor to anyone outside eligible professions. He issued a permanent injunction against enforcing the sale and purchase restrictions, then paused it for 14 days so the state can seek appellate review. The ruling does not affect the separate crime of wearing body armor while committing certain violent felonies.
Why it matters
A trial-court ruling binds only this case, but it tests how far the definition of "arms" reaches — the same text-first question at issue in the stun gun case (Calce) and the rifle cases. Watch for an appeal to the Second Circuit and a request to extend the pause.
Key dates
- Oct 21, 2026 Summary judgment for challengers; injunction paused 14 days