Good stuff. They seemed to have taken a very clear statistical analysis of "common use" and a narrow view of historic analogs - namely looking at the reasons certain laws burdening 2A were enacted.
"Because magazines are required to operate many firearms, they are “Arms” within the text of the Second Amendment—even when they can hold more than ten roundsof ammunition. Thus, magazines—including those that canhold more than 10 rounds of ammunition—are presumptively entitled to constitutional protection."
"We have observed that “millions of magazines are owned, often come factory standard with semi-automatic weapons, [and] are typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for hunting, pest-control, and occasionally self-defense.”ANJRPC II, 910 F.3d at 116 (citations omitted). Of course,not all magazines satisfy New Jersey’s definition of an LCM. But the 24 million AR-15s and similar sports rifles in circulation—firearms that we have determined are in common use for lawful purposes—typically come standard with twenty- or thirty-round magazines. And there are over 100 million 30-round AR-15 magazines in circulation."
"As with the Assault Firearm Provisions, we need not employ a “nuanced approach” to analogical reasoning about New Jersey’s LCM Provisions. Bans on weapons in common use for lawful purposes are unlawful. See Bruen, 597 U.S. at27; Heller, 554 U.S. at 628–29. So are severe restrictions on weapons in common use for lawful purposes. See Bruen, 597U.S. at 47. However much nuance we might employ, we could not overcome the dearth of relevantly similar Founding-era restrictions."