## Facts

- Paul Murphy, a lawful permanent resident of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), sought to import firearms including a .223 rifle, a WASR rifle, and a Glock pistol; CNMI customs seized them.
- After Murphy obtained and repeatedly renewed a CNMI firearms license, the .223 rifle was returned, but the WASR rifle and Glock pistol remained confiscated because CNMI authorities would not register them.
- Over several years, Murphy repeatedly applied to register the confiscated firearms and unsuccessfully attempted to import additional rifles, which he surrendered under CNMI law.
- Murphy challenged CNMI firearm measures adopted after a prior handgun-ban decision, including: licensing (safety course and background check), registration, in-home storage rules, a large-capacity magazine ban, a long-gun caliber limit (.223 and smaller), an “assault weapon” ban, restrictions effectively barring public carry/transport of operable firearms, and a $1,000 excise tax on each imported handgun.
- Defendants (the CNMI Public Safety Commissioner and the CNMI Finance Secretary, sued in their official capacities) defended the measures as public-safety regulations intended to reduce firearm violence, accidents, and proliferation.

## Issues

1. Whether the Second Amendment applies to the CNMI and constrains CNMI firearms regulation.
2. Whether CNMI’s licensing and background-check requirements, firearm registration requirements, and in-home storage rules violate the Second Amendment.
3. Whether the large-capacity magazine ban violates the Second Amendment.
4. Whether the long-gun caliber restriction and the “assault weapon” ban violate the Second Amendment.
5. Whether restrictions effectively prohibiting public carry or transport of operable firearms violate the Second Amendment.
6. Whether a $1,000 per-handgun excise tax violates the Second Amendment (and related constitutional protections).

## Decision

- On cross-motions for summary judgment, the court granted in part and denied in part each side’s motion.
- The court held the Second Amendment applies in the CNMI through federal law.
- The court upheld: licensing and background-check requirements; firearm registration requirements; certain safe-storage requirements (as construed not to force firearms to be inoperable for home defense); and the large-capacity magazine ban.
- The court invalidated: the long-gun caliber restriction (ban on rifles above .223); the “assault weapon” ban as defined; the prohibition on transporting/carrying operable firearms in public; and the $1,000 handgun excise tax.

## Legal Principles

- Fundamental constitutional protections, including the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, apply to the CNMI through federal law and limit CNMI legislation.
- Courts may use a two-step Second Amendment analysis: (1) whether regulated conduct falls within the Amendment’s historical scope; and (2) if so, whether the regulation satisfies means-end scrutiny calibrated to the burden on the right.
- Licensing, background checks, and firearm registration may be sustained as regulatory conditions that impose a limited burden and are substantially related to public-safety interests.
- In-home storage requirements are unconstitutional if they operate as a practical prohibition on keeping an operable firearm available for lawful self-defense in the home; otherwise, safety-focused storage rules may be permissible.
- Broad bans on commonly owned firearms (including sweeping caliber limits and expansive “assault weapon” definitions) fail heightened review where the government does not show a sufficient fit between the prohibition and public-safety objectives.
- The right to “bear” arms is not confined to the home; a near-total ban on public carry or transport of operable firearms imposes a severe burden and requires stronger justification than generalized safety concerns.
- A large fixed excise tax on handguns that substantially burdens acquisition of arms central to self-defense is unconstitutional when it functions to suppress exercise of the right rather than reasonably regulate it.

## Conclusion

The court recognized that the Second Amendment constrains CNMI firearms regulation, sustaining licensing/registration, certain safe-storage rules, and a large-capacity magazine ban, while striking down categorical caliber and “assault weapon” bans, an effective public-carry prohibition, and a $1,000 handgun excise tax as unjustified burdens on the right to keep and bear arms.


Murphy v. Guerrero, 2016 WL 5508998 (D.N. Mar. I. Sept. 28, 2016)