A federal appeals court on Friday struck down New Jersey’s ban on semiautomatic rifles and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, prompting the National Rifle Association (NRA) to call the decision a «historic victory» in a case the gun-rights organization has litigated since 2018.

In a sweeping en banc ruling, the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that New Jersey’s assault-firearm and large-capacity magazine restrictions violate the Second Amendment.

The court expanded a lower court’s ruling by declaring the state’s so-called «assault-firearm» ban unconstitutional as it applied to the full class of semiautomatic rifles, not just the AR-15, and also struck down New Jersey’s ban on semiautomatic rifles and its restrictions on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

DOJ SUES DENVER OVER BAN ON ‘ASSAULT WEAPONS’ AS CITY’S DEM MAYOR SAYS IT ‘WILL NOT BE BULLIED’

«This is an NRA case that we’ve been litigating since 2018, so it’s a monumental win,» Justin Davis, managing director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association, told Fox News Digital.

The NRA celebrated the decision in a statement, calling it a major victory for gun owners nationwide.

«Today marks a historic victory for the NRA, the Second Amendment, and law-abiding Americans,» the organization said.

INSIDE TRUMP’S UNPRECEDENTED BATTLE PLAN TO EXPAND SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS THROUGH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

A male buyer signs paperwork beside an AR-15 rifle with a scope in a gun shop, verifying the purchase in compliance with state regulations. (Svetlana Day via Getty Images, File)

«The Third Circuit has struck down these unconstitutional so-called assault weapons bans and magazine bans in New Jersey, affirming what we’ve always known: the right to keep and bear arms, including commonly-owned rifles and standard-capacity magazines, is fundamental and cannot be infringed by politicians who prioritize control over constitutional freedoms.»

«This ruling protects the rights of millions of responsible gun owners in the Garden State and serves as another benchmark in our efforts to dismantle gun control across the country.»

Writing for the majority, U.S. Circuit Judge Arianna Freeman, a Biden appointee, said the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and subsequent cases require governments to show modern firearm restrictions are consistent with America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Applying that framework, the court concluded New Jersey failed to meet that burden.

LAWYER WHO BEAT HAWAII GUN LAW CALLS STATE’S RELIANCE ON BLACK CODE ‘DISGRACEFUL’

The NRA celebrated the decision in a statement, calling it a major victory for gun owners nationwide.

The majority held that New Jersey’s ban on semiautomatic rifles violates the Second Amendment and reversed the district court’s decision upholding the state’s ban on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

The opinion said New Jersey enacted its «assault-firearms law» in 1990, following a California elementary school shooting.

According to the court, the governor at the time described the banned firearms as «guns capable of wholesale destruction» that were «designed to wipe out the greatest number of people in the shortest possible time.»

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The majority concluded that semiautomatic rifles and magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are protected by the Second Amendment and that New Jersey failed to demonstrate the restrictions are consistent with America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Several judges dissented, arguing the banned firearms are unusually dangerous military-style weapons that states have long had authority to regulate and that the decision conflicts with every other federal appeals court to uphold similar state restrictions.

There are 86,410 seconds in a day. 

1,440 minutes. 

The most daylight in Washington, D.C. emerges in June, stretching 14 hours and 57 minutes. 

The shortest is near the winter solstice, clocking in at a scant nine hours and 29 minutes.

Congress can’t change any of that. But it can alter how we perceive it.

Lawmakers routinely fork over to public tax cuts, economic stimulus and the elimination of a cumbersome law or policy. 

Awarding something to the voters is part of the Congressional DNA.

So even though time is finite, lawmakers are again trying to give people something: more daylight.

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved the Sunshine Protection Act this week, 308-117. 

HOUSE PASSES SUNSHINE PROTECTION ACT TO MAKE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME PERMANENT

No. Our sun wasn’t in jeopardy of going supernova — although it is about halfway through its 10 billion year lifespan. Lawmakers weren’t safeguarding it. But they wanted you to think they were.

The Sunshine Protection Act permanently shifts the U.S. onto Daylight Saving Time. That’s a congressionally contrived temporal statute.

In other words, with adoption of the bill, we will never shift back to Standard Time again. 

No more «springing forward» or «falling back.»

We’re on Daylight Saving Time now. And we are here to stay if this becomes law.

«Polling shows that two-thirds of Americans want to unlock the clock. My bill is simply a solution to make Daylight Saving Time permanent,» said Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), one of the chief sponsors of the legislation. «Allowing an extra hour of sunlight in the evening gives families more time for outside sports activities and school.»

An extra hour of sunlight? Really?

In other words, it’s really the same amount of light – or lack thereof – at 7 p.m. under Daylight Saving Time that we could experience at 6 p.m. under Standard Time.

But Congress is in the giving business.

«Why are we forcing families, businesses, and communities to adjust their schedules every spring and fall? The twice-yearly clock change is a relic of the past that no longer reflects the way Americans live,» said Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.)

Perhaps it’s an idea whose time has come.

Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., is a lead sponsor of the Sunshine Protection Act, legislation that would end the twice-yearly clock changes. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The biannual time change is maddening.

My mother taught second grade at the same elementary school I attended in rural Ohio. 

One year, the school custodian got to work early on the Monday morning after the fall time change. He began to reset the clocks in each classroom. He maneuvered from south to north through the building, updating the clocks in the kindergarten. Then onto the first grade. Second grade after that. Third grade. Finally, fourth grade.

But as you traversed the school, each clock ran two to three minutes behind the one the custodian set previously.

We theorized that he looked at his watch, say around 7:10 a.m. – and proceeded to set each clock to 7:10 – regardless of the actual time. By the time you got to fourth grade, the clocks were nearly 20 minutes behind schedule.

As they say, timing is everything.

Only an episode involving my mother and grandmother tops the school’s time warp.

My mother once called my grandmother to remind her the time change would kick in at 2 a.m. on Sunday.

My grandmother was incredulous.

«You mean I have to sit up until two o’clock in the morning to change it?» she asked.

Establishing a year-around time isn’t something worth losing sleep over. Most just hate the exercise.

HOUSE PASSES DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME REFORM AS TRUMP SIGNALS SUPPORT FOR ENDING CLOCK CHANGE

«People in Tennessee wanted it gone. It’s ridiculous. In the fall it starts getting dark around 5:00. Kind of depresses me. Really kind of a doggy downer. So I’m kind of digging the fact that we’re going to fix it,» said Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.)

Only one member spoke out in opposition when the House debated the time-change bill: Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) 

Her grievances focused on why Congress was even considering the legislation when it wasn’t trained on bread-and-butter subjects which could be key in the midterms.

«We aren’t voting on bills right now that would reduce the sky-high costs of food, fuel, health care, or addressing the President’s war in Iran. Instead, we’re considering a bill that was deadly and dangerous in the past, in the ‘70s,» said Dean.

Dean is referring to an experiment in 1974. Congress voted in late 1973 to park the nation on Daylight Saving Time for two solid years. This would help combat the OPEC oil embargo and fuel shortages.

Daylight saving time (DST), or turning the clock by an hour, is ineffective in reducing energy expenditures and lends health consequences, experts say. (iStock)

It was a disaster.

Kids in Washington, DC headed for school around 8:30 a.m. It’s unclear whether the custodian properly adjusted the clocks. But it was «jet black» in DC, according to one news account from the time. Some kids set off for school with flashlights illuminating their paths.

You might not give politics the time of day.

But the time of day infuriated Americans in the mid-1970s.

Seventy-nine percent of those surveyed embraced the year-round time switch in December 1973. 

But that number plunged to 42 percent by August 1974.

Future Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) offered a measure to torpedo the Daylight Saving Time project. It passed. And by fall, everyone was falling back.

A House panel examining the issue declared that changing the clocks «must be balanced against a majority of the public’s distaste for the observance of Daylight Saving Time.»

In 2022, the Senate unexpectedly approved a year-round Daylight Saving Time bill. But it languished as the House hit the snooze button.

Now the House approved an updated version of the legislation. President Trump called switching the clocks «ridiculous.» Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) even discussed the issue with him this week.

President Donald Trump has expressed support for ending the twice-yearly clock changes as the Senate considers the Sunshine Protection Act. (SAUL LOEB / AFP via Getty Images)

«He seems to be very enthusiastic about it. I would put it that way. And I think we’re going to move the bill pretty quickly,» said Kennedy. «Some of my colleagues are opposed to it. They’re entitled with their opinion. But I think we’ll have a vote soon.»

If the Senate passes the bill, some people will say it’s about time.

But others, like Madeleine Dean, remember the 1970s.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

George Santayana declared that «those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.»

But if you’re running an hour ahead of Daylight Saving Time, perhaps you should switch your clock back and fix it to Standard Time.

La ministra de Relaciones Exteriores de El Salvador, Alexandra Hill, y el director ejecutivo interino del Programa Mundial de Alimentos (PMA), Carl Skau, reafirmaron este viernes el compromiso de fortalecer la seguridad alimentaria de la población salvadoreña. El encuentro se realizó en el marco de la visita oficial de Skau, quien llegó al país para evaluar los avances de la colaboración conjunta y explorar nuevas vías de cooperación.

El Ministerio detalló que existe un marco de cooperación quinquenal, vigente desde 2022, con una asignación de USD 129.2 millones. Este acuerdo se consolidó para complementar las políticas y programas que impulsa el Gobierno de El Salvador en materia de alimentación y nutrición, especialmente en las zonas más vulnerables. Según comunicó la Cancillería, el aporte técnico y financiero del PMA ha permitido ampliar el alcance de las iniciativas orientadas a la protección de los sectores más desfavorecidos.

Entre las principales acciones derivadas de esta alianza, el Ministerio citó proyectos de preparación y respuesta ante emergencias, ejercicios de fortalecimiento de capacidades para pequeños productores agrícolas y apoyo a emprendedores en el sector alimentario. Además, se han implementado programas de alimentación escolar y de nutrición infantil, que buscan mejorar los indicadores de salud de la niñez salvadoreña. La cartera de Estado subrayó que estas iniciativas han generado oportunidades directas para miles de personas en situación de vulnerabilidad.

Durante la reunión, la ministra Hill destacó la relevancia de la cooperación internacional y reconoció el papel estratégico que desempeña el PMA en la agenda de desarrollo nacional.

Una de las experiencias que más atención ha recibido es el programa GastroLab, que ofrece formación culinaria a jóvenes de distintas localidades con el propósito de facilitar su inserción en los sectores turístico, hotelero y restaurantero. El Ministerio señaló que esta propuesta no solo responde a la necesidad de empleo juvenil, sino que también impulsa el desarrollo de industrias que han mostrado una tendencia de crecimiento sostenido en los últimos años.

Por su parte, el director ejecutivo interino del PMA, Carl Skau, acudió al encuentro acompañado de la representante del organismo en El Salvador, María Guimarães. Skau valoró el trabajo conjunto y coincidió con la canciller Hill en la importancia de mantener y ampliar la cooperación. De acuerdo con el comunicado, ambas partes reiteraron su interés en avanzar hacia la seguridad y sostenibilidad alimentaria para todos los habitantes del país.

La Cancillería recalcó que el respaldo del PMA se ha traducido en resultados concretos: más comunidades atendidas durante emergencias, mayor acceso a capacitación para productores y emprendedores, y una mejora sustantiva en los servicios de alimentación escolar. El Ministerio puntualizó que la coordinación con el organismo de Naciones Unidas ha fortalecido los mecanismos de respuesta rápida ante desastres y emergencias alimentarias.

Por su parte, el PMA remarcó que la cooperación con El Salvador constituye una referencia en la región centroamericana. Según la representación del organismo, los proyectos ejecutados han permitido replicar buenas prácticas y lecciones aprendidas en otros países con desafíos similares en materia de seguridad alimentaria.