[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. The New Jersey Attorney General, Matt Platkin, is my first guest today. He's been in the news for a few things recently, especially for filing a civil rights lawsuit against several local school districts. The districts had announced policies requiring schools to notify parents if their children asked to change their gender pronouns or show evidence of gender identity changes in any way.

Platkin has now won the first round in that suit, a preliminary injunction that stops the policies from taking effect while the full case is heard. The school districts in question are in Middletown Township, Marlboro Township, and Manalapan-Englishtown. Platkin filed an earlier suit against the school board in Hanover, which, for the moment, has withdrawn the policy there.

To those who see this as a parental rights issue, Platkin's office says, "We can both keep parents informed about their children's development and protect the civil rights of our most vulnerable students." Now, this, as many of you know, is a central flashpoint in national politics right now. Republicans especially are already making it a top-tier issue for the 2024 presidential and congressional elections.

We talked about this on the show last week actually. Nancy Solomon, our New Jersey host filling in for me, talked about this on the show last week. Now, we can hear from the attorney general himself. We'll take calls and touch on other issues too with New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin. Attorney General, thanks for coming on to have this sometimes difficult conversation yourself, and welcome back to WNYC.

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Thanks for having me, Brian. It's never difficult to be here with you. Appreciate it.

Brian Lehrer: Can you first describe what the school districts want to do that you went to court over? Just describe what would be in those new policies if they were to take effect.

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Well, each one is a little different. Effectively, it would require and place an affirmative duty on teachers and other employees at school districts to affirmatively inform parents of any indication of a student's change in gender identity or expression in some cases even broader to include any identification as a member of the LGBTQ community. There's a few things that I think are really important here. First, the state is not, has not, and will not seek a "ban" on parental notification. It's a lie.

We've never done that. What we have sought in these cases is simply to go back to a policy that all of these school districts and the hundreds of school districts throughout the state found unobjectionable until just a few months ago, which says, of course, you can tell parents about issues going on with their student, including changes in gender identity and expression. You just have to consider the individual circumstances of that child as opposed to making a blanket affirmative requirement based on a characteristic.

In some cases, based on information that you may overhear in a hallway that is protected under state law. Now, I'm a parent. I have two young kids. One very young. If I sound a little groggy right now, I apologize. I certainly understand why any parent would want to be involved in their kids' lives. Excuse me. I want to be, but we have to also understand that with trans youth, we are talking about the most vulnerable kids anywhere in our state. Over half of trans kids attempt suicide.

Not think about it, not go on Google and search it, attempt it. Rates of homelessness amongst trans kids are through the roof. While many, many families with trans kids embrace them and love them and give them the nurturing home that we would all want for our kids, unfortunately, there are instances where there is abuse in the home just like there is abuse in the home that we protect in a variety of other circumstances. All we are saying is before you tell a parent, you have to consider the individual circumstances of that child.

The reason why I know this is not actually a real issue for these districts is because they can't point to a single instance where they wanted to tell the parents about a student's gender identity or expression. They thought it was in the best interest of the child, but they couldn't do so because of the policy. All we're saying is to go back to that. What I find, I have to say, particularly offensive in this conversation about parental choice and parental involvement is look at the range of other issues that affect parents' rights in the state.

Where some of the same people who are pushing these lawsuits are, take guns. Our office is in court right now fighting against a lawsuit and a number of lawsuits that want to mandate and take away parents' rights to keep guns out of the kids' classrooms, out of schools, out of parks, out of playgrounds, out of zoos. They want to take away our right to say no to that. When I drop off my four-year-old at preschool, if those lawsuits are successful, I would have no right as a parent to keep the single most dangerous object for a student in America out of his class.

Guns are the single biggest killer of kids in America. That is an unfortunate and tragic distinction that we have. The parental choice conversation around trans youth ignores that. You're more likely to be killed by a gun if you're a kid than falling into a pool or getting hit by a car or getting cancer certainly than if you have a member of your school who is dealing with gender identity issues. Yet, we somehow don't talk about that fact as a parental choice issue.

What these districts are doing is effectively creating mandates for teachers and other school employees that put them in the middle of sometimes dangerous situations for their kids. More importantly, what the policies are doing is I think it's distorting a conversation about what is actually happening amongst our kids, whether it be with guns or social media or a whole host of other issues that we know are really dangerous for them. It's putting the most vulnerable kids in our state at risk.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, we're going to open the phones on this right from near the start here. If you are trans or non-binary or the parent of a child who may be trans or non-binary or if you're a teacher or a school social worker or anyone else with a connection to this issue, call us up and say what you think policy should be and what civil rights law-- and we'll get to why this has been filed as a civil rights lawsuit, what civil rights law should be interpreted to be on parental notification of kids' gender-nonconforming signs at school, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692.

You can also text your comment or question to that number, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. Parents, transgender individuals, or non-binary individuals, teachers, social workers, school administrators, anybody with a connection to this issue or any question for New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin on this or other issues his office deals with as well, we will get to some other issues as we go.

Attorney General, I have a friend in a school district on Long Island who has a child identified at birth as a girl, who just finished first grade and has been saying for years that she's a boy. During this past school year, first grade, the child asked to use the boys' bathroom. According to my friend, the family got a lovely call from the school social worker asking if this was a surprise to the parents, which it was not.

My friend says the social worker and the school in general were very supportive of the child and making the child comfortable was a goal and being who the child feels that they are is a goal. My friend was very pleased that the school notified them because, now, they're coordinating explicitly on supporting the child. I realized that not all parents would respond that way, which I think is your point. Do you have stories where notification of the parents, I should say, turned out badly for the child?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: First of all, Brian, I'm glad to hear your friend's experience. I think that is the overwhelming experience. I've talked to a lot of teachers and other educators and school professionals throughout the state, including in some of the districts that we're talking about who have said that's exactly what has happened and would happen. There are some circumstances again where it doesn't. Are there examples? I referenced without going into specific cases.

Yes, there are a lot of examples unfortunately where trans youth are not received with the same kind of love and care in the home just like, by the way, there's abuse cases of children in a lot of contexts. We provide custody and care for those kids. All we're saying here is in circumstances like your friend's, nobody is saying the parent couldn't be notified. What happens if that same student tells the teacher and says, "I have to tell somebody. "Please, God, don't tell my parents. I'm afraid and they might hurt me."

Now, what these policies would do is disregard what that student said and place an affirmative duty that a teacher or an educator or a professional in a school could violate and put their job at risk if they didn't go ahead and notify the parents anyway. Now, I'm not trans. I've never experienced what it's like to have to come out as trans. I've heard a lot of trans youth and trans adults talk about their experience. I think that's a deeply personal one and probably extremely frightening point in their lives.

All we are saying here again is that schools absolutely can tell parents not just about this issue but about all kinds of things and should tell parents all kinds of things going on in their student's lives, but there are certain cases where it's detrimental to the student's health and safety. Schools should, under the law, have to at least consider those circumstances when making that notification decision. I think that's a relatively unobjectionable statement when it comes to keeping our kids safe.

Brian Lehrer: Let's take a phone call. You may not be surprised to learn that our lines immediately filled up when we put out the invitation on this topic. On Line 1 is Andy in Astoria, Queens. Andy, you're on WNYC with New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin.

Andy: Hi, Brian. Thanks for taking my call. Well, I had a question and a follow-up statement actually. The question would be, because I understand that the attorney general wants the schools to be the judge of who to notify and whose parents to notify and whose parents not to notify, are the schools able to do that for sensitive case when it comes to these type of issues because these are very sensitive issues, first of all?

Second, what was there to prevent the schools from-- because I heard the attorney general say, "Well, the student may say to their school, 'Well, can you please not tell my parents because they're going to kill me if they find out?'" The student can say that about many other things. The students can say that about receiving bad grades. The students can say that about many other things. What is the limit? That's first.

Second, I heard the attorney general say that he's doing this to prevent these transgender kids to not commit suicide because the suicide rates of transgender kids is very high. The problem is, by doing that, all studies out there show that if you take the network of support away from these kids and you leave them alone, the suicide rate will be higher. The sole network of support that these kids may have, maybe their families, maybe their extended family. If you take that away from there and if you leave these kids to deal with these issues by themselves, are we really increasing the chances of these kids committing suicide by being out there in the world by themselves?

Brian Lehrer: Andy, it's a very thoughtful question. I think it's a good one for, hopefully, some of the people in school administration or school social work, school teaching, who might be calling in on some other lines to talk about best practices as they see it, and when they do have the right to use their judgment, how they determine as a matter of best practice, when to notify parents and when not to notify parents. Attorney General Platkin, how would you answer Andy's question?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Well, first of all, thank you, Andy, for the question. I'm not a school professional. I don't pretend to be. I am married to a school psychologist. What we want is for the professionals in these schools to be able to do their jobs. That's what they've been doing for a long time until really just a few months ago when these policies suddenly came under attack, I believe, largely for political purposes. To answer your question, are we putting kids at risk?

Look, I didn't make the value judgment here about what is and isn't protected under state law. The student not wanting to disclose his grades, not protected under our state civil rights statutes. A student's gender identity and expression is explicitly protected under the state's law against discrimination, our nation's oldest and arguably strongest civil rights statute. It's not my choice as to whether or not that's protected information. It's the law.

I'm the chief law enforcement officer in the state and I have an obligation to enforce that law. What we've said and what the Department of Education and state's policies have said now as I've said for several years is that, yes, in these circumstances, parents absolutely can be notified, but the law requires that you take into account the individual circumstances of that child and not make a parental notification strictly on the basis of a protected characteristic. In this case, their identity as trans or a member of the LGBTQ community.

The law is the law. That's why we have won resoundingly in every court that has heard this. The overarching point about do we want kids to be in a bubble and keep their information to themselves, the answer to that, of course, is no. I would argue and the evidence, I think, bears this out that if students feel, particularly students who feel at risk at home-- and again, we're talking about students who are truly at risk.

We're not talking about students who have loving and supporting parents who probably already know about their student's gender or their children's gender identity issues, but we want those students who do have genuine fears to feel like they can talk to somebody. In some cases, a school counselor, a teacher is that person. I talked to a lot of teachers and counselors who have been that person.

It is less likely that that student is going to come forward and talk to anybody if they feel they're going to be outed against their will. That is why you've seen, I think, widespread pushback from the LGBTQ community against these policies. Again, I think despite what has been said, really what we're asking for is something that hundreds of school districts continue to find unobjectionable and that these very districts did not object to until just a few months ago.

Brian Lehrer: Here's a text message that has come in from a clinical psychologist. This person identifies themselves as specializing in trans youth who consulted on early trans student policies in New Jersey, they say. This person writes, "Forced outing is lethal. Parental rejection is, by far, the biggest predictor of suicide in this population who have astronomical suicide rates. Safety at school mitigates that risk for students with rejecting families. Youth will not come out at school if they don't have control over their info, thus robbing them of any safe space." There's that from a clinical psychologist specializing in trans youth. Here's Michelle in Monmouth County. Michelle, you're on WNYC. Thank you for calling today.

Michelle: Thank you. I wanted to call because I am a trans woman. I'm 23 years old. I've had gender dysphoria since I was 12 years old. When I was listening, I was a little surprised about-- Well, not surprised. I was in Middlesex Township when they made that vote. I don't always listen on the radio. Today, I didn't think I'd be able to hear about this, but I'm glad that you're talking about it, Brian Lehrer. I really appreciate you bringing this to light. It's very concerning to me.

While I am afraid about this moral panic that some conservative parents like to bring up, I feel reassured by the attorney general to stand up for trans people like me and people that are younger than me in the Monmouth County schools. It's kind of a coincidence. Yesterday, I spoke to a good friend of mine from college. They're on a board of education in Monmouth County. I asked them specifically about these votes.

This board of ed member told me that with every board of ed, they're always recommended these specific guidelines like financial when it comes to safety. The school board generally would agree with these two, I'm going to call, arbitrators. 9 times out of 10, they're just going to agree with them. For some reason, on a whim, Middletown, Marlboro, and Manalapan just went on a whim and just tried to fuel the flames of this moral panic against the trans community. It's not right. The people are just gaining notoriety because of it.

Brian Lehrer: Michelle, let me leave it there. Thank you very much for all of that. I'm going to follow up on your remark in a very specific way. Attorney General, I want to play a clip and ask you if you got a sense from any of the school districts, as our caller Michelle is suggesting, that there is an anti-trans, anti-non-binary political agenda as is being expressed in some of the national political debate. For example, here's a few seconds from Vivek Ramaswamy in last week's Republican presidential debate.

Vivek Ramaswamy: This is our moment to revive those common ideals. God is real. There are two genders. Fossil fuels are a requirement for human prosperity.

Brian Lehrer: Tucked in that list was his framing as a common American ideal that there are just two genders. Obviously, it was not a principle of the Founding Fathers as he argued there if you listen to the whole clip, but we're hearing versions of that from many on the political right. Do you think that kind of political agenda to really wipe out or deny trans or non-binary identity altogether is part of what's going on in any of these school districts in New Jersey when they say "parental rights" as opposed to having the best interest of the child or the family in mind?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: First of all, thank you, Michelle, for your call and for sharing your story. I can't speak to the motivations of individual boards. I won't assume that I think everybody's trying to do what they think is the right thing. I do think some things around these boards are being fueled by the national and state political dialogue that you just referenced. It's a dialogue that I think is dangerous. Again, I just find it offensive.

I didn't hear in Vivek Ramaswamy's comments about all kinds of other things that affect kids' health, safety, and welfare. I've mentioned guns. I didn't hear him say anything about social media companies that are deliberately targeting our kids that add to the detriment of their mental health. I didn't hear him talk about the fact that we're not letting parents choose which books in some cases kids can read.

I didn't hear about the fact that the very same people who are talking about trans-parental rights are objecting to people to have the choice as to whether they want to be a parent themselves in cases of sexual assault and medical risks to the mother. I think this conversation really has gotten warped. It's getting warped in a way that potentially hurts kids. I'm not in politics. My job is to enforce the law. As I said earlier, our law protects gender identity and expression. It's very clear. When you target people on the basis of a protected characteristic, you're violating the law.

Brian Lehrer: That's why it's a civil rights lawsuit, right?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: That's why we filed it as a civil rights lawsuit. The same way if you discriminate against someone for being a woman or for being a member of a particular religion or for being Black or Latino, all of which is protected under a law. That was a decision made by the legislature and the governor and that is the law of New Jersey. We are enforcing that law. Look, I don't think it's any accident that these cases are developing in and around an election season in New Jersey.

As you know, we have an election this year. I just would hope that if we want to have a conversation about parental rights, let's have it. As a parent, I care about that more than anything. Let's do it in a way that doesn't target our kids, that doesn't put vulnerable kids at risk to score cheap political points. Let's actually talk about all of the things that are putting our kids at risk. Let's talk about the fact that you want guns in our kids' classroom.

Let's talk about the fact that some of these same legislators that are pushing these lawsuits are filing bills that prevent my office from suing social media companies when they harm our youth. Let's talk about those things because I think those are part of an actual conversation about parental rights and parental choice in our state and not one that is meant to work up what I think is, frankly, a hysteria that puts vulnerable kids at even greater risk.

Brian Lehrer: Let's hear from a parent who had this experience of being notified by the school, and it's Robin in Harlem calling in. Robin, you're on WNYC. Thank you for being with us.

Robin: Sure. Thank you for this really important topic. My daughter is trans. When she was going through her realization of her sexuality and her sexual identity and orientation, all that, when she was a sophomore in high school and she was a he then, her teacher phoned me to let me know that my child was in a kind of a gender transition phase and maybe was not straight, maybe was gay or bi. I already knew all this and so I thanked her and didn't think anything of it.

Then I told my child, who was rightly appalled, and said, "How did she know that you wouldn't kick me out of the house or put me in some kind of reprogramming camp? How did she know that you were okay with all that?" It was my daughter who taught me like, "Oh, wait a minute. That's right. I could have been the parent who then went off the rails about my child's sexuality." It was a wake-up moment for me. Frankly, I feel so strongly about this because of the risk, the vulnerability, the suicide, the sense of isolation, the way in which trans kids feel so alone. Thank you for this really important topic.

Brian Lehrer: Robin, can I ask you, what attitude did you discern from your daughter's teacher? Like in the case of my friend if you heard me describe that story earlier, were they really trying to be supportive and team up with you in the best interests of the child or were they trying to say, "You better know. There could be a problem"? What did you get they were trying to accomplish by calling you?

Robin: In the moment, I didn't really think about that. Then in reflecting on it afterwards, it was more the latter like, "Oh, oh, oh, you better watch out. This is something you need to be aware of." In fact, it was creepy actually in hindsight.

Brian Lehrer: Would you rather that schools be barred? This is not what the attorney general is seeking in the lawsuit, but would you rather that schools be barred from notifying the parents because they don't know which ones are going to freak out and lead to a potential suicide, or would you rather them be able to use their judgment on a case-by-case basis if you've thought it through to that degree?

Robin: It should absolutely be case-by-case. If a student has enough trust in a teacher to confide in her or him, can the teacher then ask the student, "May I talk to your folks about this or would you rather that I not?" I have a question actually for you two. I am a teacher at the college level and I am required to pass along information about things like sexual abuse if a student confides in me. Not that I'm required to tell their parents, but I'm required to pass it up the chain. That's a law in New York. I wonder if teachers have a similar responsibility and if a child revealing her gender issues qualifies if a teacher is-- Is that an issue here with this particular concern?

Brian Lehrer: That's an interesting question, what they call mandatory reporters, teachers, and others if they're hearing of cases of abuse. In those cases, of course, it's different in that the child is being victimized or they suspect that the child is being victimized, so they're required to report it. Attorney General, how would you answer that question?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Brian, I think you answered it pretty well. There certainly are mandatory reporting statutes as it relates to this particular issue. As I've said, really the facts and circumstances of each case under the policy is what guides the school's decisions. As you've said, I think that's the appropriate thing to happen. We have the best public schools in America for a reason.

We have the finest public-school professionals and school professionals in our schools that have proven again that they are able to handle these sensitive cases, have done so for years, and did so without objection until just a few months ago. As it relates to mandatory reporting, we do have that, but I think that's a distinct issue from what we're talking about here.

Brian Lehrer: All right. Listeners, if you join during the segment, the news is there's a preliminary court injunction stopping for the moment these various New Jersey school districts from implementing the mandatory notification of parents policy if their child is showing signs of being gender-nonconforming or changing their pronouns or anything in that direction. We will see how the full case winds up as it winds its way through the court system in New Jersey. We're going to keep the New Jersey Attorney General, Matt Platkin, with us on another couple of issues that his office is dealing with, including this police shooting in Jersey City on Sunday. Stay with us.

[music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. A few more minutes with New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin. Attorney General, I was going to ask you anyway about this program that you have called ARRIVE Together for police officers and mental health professionals arriving in mental health emergencies. I was going to ask you about that anyway, and now comes this story, this police killing in Jersey City on Sunday. I'm going to read the first couple of paragraphs from our Gothamist article on that.

It says Jersey City's mayor is defending his police department after officers shot and killed a man, who officials say was experiencing a mental health crisis Sunday, saying they tried to de-escalate the situation before using deadly force. Family members tell media, they're seeking answers and that they only wanted help from mental health responders, not a violent encounter with police. My understanding is you are looking into this situation as the state attorney general. What's your understanding of it so far?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Well, Brian, I'll have to disappoint you because, under state law, every fatal police encounter, every officer-involved shooting that results in death, my office takes the case. An independent team investigates it and presents every one of these cases to the grand jury. We are unique in that nationally. I'm very proud of the work that that team does to investigate some of the most challenging and difficult cases we face.

This case too will be thoroughly investigated and presented to the grand jury. I can't comment on that particular case, nor would it be appropriate to comment on a case before the investigation is completed or wouldn't want to influence witness statements or other investigative actions that may occur. We will, of course, produce the body cam footage in this case as we do in all of our cases in as timely a manner as we can.

New Jersey is a national leader in transparency on this front. We strive to put out body camera footage within 20 days of an incident. Sometimes it takes a little longer if we aren't able to get all the requisite witness statements in time. That's because you don't want people reviewing the footage before they come in and give a statement. We will, of course, do that and do it transparently. Let me say clearly to the family of Mr. Washington.

Any loss of life is a tragedy. My thoughts are with them and the community in Jersey City. The reason why ARRIVE, I think, is so transformational is because in over 40 municipalities throughout the state, nine counties, we've partnered with local organizations and community groups and mental health providers and have provided services to people suffering from mental health or emotional distress in a more clinically appropriate way.

We've done it based on a recognition that we in this state and in this country ask our law enforcement officers to do too much that no one person can be a police officer, a mental health professional, a behavioral health specialist, an addiction counselor, and social worker, and all of the in-between. ARRIVE has taken different forms and different communities, but at its core is a commitment to providing clinically appropriate treatment to people in mental health or emotional distress. We've now helped almost 1,000 people throughout the state through this program.

We've had no injuries, essentially no arrests or use of force, certainly no use of lethal force, and we've gotten people better healthcare treatment. I'm really grateful, the governor and the legislature in this most recent budget that was passed last June appropriated money to help us expand this program statewide. What we need is local governmental partners as we do this. I'm confident that we will get to every community in the state as we said we would. When we do, it will save lives. It will absolutely make cases like this one more rare, which I think is everybody's goal. As it relates to the case, I unfortunately can't comment on the specifics.

Brian Lehrer: I understand. What was that number that you gave for the number of communities in New Jersey using the ARRIVE Together program? Did you say about 40?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: More than 40 and 9 counties, yes, including we do have some communities in Hudson County.

Brian Lehrer: Of course, there are more than, or there are approximately 600 municipalities in the state of New Jersey. That leaves a lot to go. My understanding is the program does not yet exist in Jersey City. How long do you think it'll take to expand the program statewide and would mental health workers be allowed to respond in a situation where somebody might be armed?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Our goal is to expand and we're expanding this very aggressively. Our goal is to expand it over the course of the next year, which is what we got the funding for. Again, we're doing everything we can. It does take local governmental partners. I'm hopeful that everyone will see the value in this program. Each ARRIVE expansion is a little different. That's the way it should be because if you're talking about community involvement in law enforcement, then you have to listen to what the community wants.

You have to understand the needs of that particular community and also the resources available in that community. In some communities like we did originally in Cumberland County and then expanded into Union County, and now in several other counties, including Hudson, Middlesex, and Essex, we have what is called a co-responder model where when a call comes into 911, it's clearly a mental health or emotional distress call.

We dispatch a team consisting of a plainclothes officer, so not in uniform, in an unmarked car with a mental health professional. They respond together and at the direction of the clinician. That is one response that has proven effective even in cases where there have been potential for violence. In other cases, we've used models that don't have any law enforcement involvement led by social workers and mental health professionals.

In some other cases, we're using telehealth where officers are provided with tablets that they're able to give to the person struggling with mental health issues that give them real-time access to a mental health professional. We're trying different programs again in tandem with communities to see what works. Then as we expand this statewide, we will endeavor to provide services that are tailored to the needs of a particular community.

The overarching result is clear. 1,000 people just about helped, no injuries, no use of lethal force, virtually no use of force. Really, the only use of force was in connection with helping transport somebody to mental health treatment at the direction of the mental health professional, and ultimately stronger community trust and better mental health outcomes. I think this program is transformational.

One, it is statewide. We'll be the first state in the country to have an alternative response program statewide. I think it helps law enforcement officers be more effective in their jobs. I think it provides better healthcare treatment to individuals who need it. Ultimately, it helps strengthen trust between communities and law enforcement that is so essential for us to provide the public safety that our residents deserve.

Brian Lehrer: New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin with us. Another question I was going to ask you, another topic that you're involved with that I was going to ask you about anyway, and then you brought it up in connection with gender expression among public school students issue that we touched on before, has to do with where people can bring guns, because I know you're involved with a case on whether the state can ban people from bringing firearms into what you call sensitive places. I guess that would include schools. That's the context you brought it up in earlier. How do you fairly define a sensitive place without violating a New Jerseyan's Second Amendment rights as defined by the Supreme Court and where does that case stand?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Well, thank you. I think this is among the most critical issues that we're facing, not just in this state but in this country. The Bruen decision, which is the law but upended not just over a century of practice as it relates to concealed carry but also fundamentally changed how our gun laws are reviewed by our courts. Our office, I am proud, is defending every single one of our gun laws.

The NRA has made it very clear. They're going to challenge all of them. We have had a pretty high success rate in defending them. I'm proud of that. I'm also proud of the fact that, thanks to the work of legislature, the governor, Governor Murphy, and many others, we have the strongest gun laws in America. As a result of that, you're safer in New Jersey than just about anywhere else in America.

You are six times more likely to be shot and killed in Mississippi than you are in New Jersey. That's not an accident. That happens because of, not in spite of our strong gun safety laws. It's really not up to me to decide what a sensitive space is. The legislature and the governor duly considered the Bruen decision and passed a comprehensive revision to our concealed-carry laws last December.

I'm proud that the appellate court just said that law can remain in effect, that it's consistent with the Bruen decision. The Bruen decision did not say that you could have no gun safety laws. It said you have to have laws that are consistent with the historical practice. What we've shown is that the sensitive spaces that the governor and the legislature have said you cannot carry a firearm in are rooted in our nation's history. Think about what we're talking about.

This is not theoretical stuff, Brian. I've mentioned schools. Again, somebody can walk into your kid's classroom without your consent carrying a firearm under their waist. That's what we're talking about. The same in parks and zoos and bars and restaurants where people are drinking or even into your own house without your consent. When you call a plumber or a maintenance person to come to your house, should they have to at least ask you for permission before they bring a firearm where you may have kids running around?

Again, going back to parental choice, I would argue, yes. The courts so far have said that the law that requires that is entirely constitutional. We will continue to fight for these laws because they keep people safe. Gun violence is an epidemic in our country. It is an epidemic in New Jersey. While we have one of the lowest rates of gun violence in the country, it's not zero.

Everything we do, whether it be defending our gun laws, whether it be taking an intelligence-based approach to prosecution to hold accountable people who are truly driving violence, whether it be the work we're doing to hold gun manufacturers and retailers accountable for the violence they're causing and the profits that they're making off of this bloodshed, whether it be the violence intervention work that we're investing in at national leading levels to provide credible messengers in communities who can reach people that law enforcement can't reach and help disrupt that cycle of violence, all of this goes to saving lives.

I'm thrilled that the Third Circuit agreed with us that that law that you mentioned, the sensitive spaces law remains in effect, that it is the law that you cannot carry a concealed firearm into a school or a park or a zoo or a bar or a restaurant or many other places, and that the court said it's consistent with the Second Amendment because, ultimately, it will save lives.

Brian Lehrer: Into a park? Isn't a park just an open public space where one might think the Second Amendment would apply?

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Again, everything that the law that we provided extensive historical analogs that showed-- What that means is you have to show, "Okay, at the founding or at the time of the Civil War, these practices were in effect." That's what the Supreme Court said. When we talk about carrying in schools, we had to show similar situations at the time of the founding was in place.

That's what you have to show, to show that something is consistent with the Second Amendment. The court agreed with us that it was. It's gotten to be so hair-splitting. "Okay, can we carry in a playground here or a park here?" What we need the public to know is that there are sensitive spaces that are clearly laid out in the law that they cannot carry. People should have confidence that are going into safe places that they will not be put at risk.

Brian Lehrer: One more issue real quick. Much lighter than the life and death issues that we've been talking about so far, but it's certainly going to get everybody in New Jersey's attention when we say it has to do with cars. The issue is car theft and what's come to be known on social media as the Kia Boys. Explain that and your role in it real briefly and then we're out of time.

Attorney General Matt Platkin: I'll be brief. I don't actually think it's a light issue because stolen cars are a serious issue. They not only threaten people's quality of life but they have been used to fuel other violent activity. We have aggressively tackled the stolen car issue and we've driven numbers down significantly by investing in our auto theft task force, which takes a statewide approach to auto thefts.

Governor Murphy has put millions of dollars into providing technology that prevents them. The biggest challenge we face right now are Hyundais and Kias, which last year accounted for just 6.5% of vehicles stolen. Sorry. They count for 6.5% of vehicles in New Jersey but 19% of the auto thefts. That's because, as you said, of these TikTok and social media challenges where it shows very easily how to steal certain models of Kias.

Kia and Hyundai thefts are up 226% this year. If you have a Kia or Hyundai, go on their website because there are software upgrades that you can get at no charge. Please, if you have any Kia or Hyundai model, go on the website and see if you're eligible because it will make your car safer. The companies are also providing steering wheel locks or reimbursement for those locks for people who need them.

Lastly, we are also leading a multi-state effort against these car companies to provide adequate compensation for our residents. We are taking aggressively every action we can to drive those numbers down, but the problem right now is, frankly, largely driven by Kias and Hyundais. If you have one of those cars, please go to their website, see if you're eligible for an upgrade, and get it, and then also take advantage of other free resources that the manufacturers are providing.

Brian Lehrer: New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin. Thanks for all your time this morning and thanks for taking phone calls from our listeners.

Attorney General Matt Platkin: Thanks so much for having me, Brian.

 

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.