New Jersey’s ERPO Media Blitz and Its Staggering Price Tag

New Jersey launched a campaign earlier this year to promote extreme risk protective orders. The attorney general’s media blitz comes with a staggering price tag that raises lots of questions.

ERPO Public Awareness Campaign History

In May 2026, New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport announced an extreme risk protective order “public awareness campaign.” The ERPO, or “red flag” law, was signed in June 2018 by ex-Governor Phil Murphy; a move that he said would protect children and families from the “reckless dangers of gun violence.” Nearly a decade later, the current administration has resorted to a campaign to get the word out, and it comes with a pretty heavy price tag.

Records obtained by Bearing Arms indicate that $750,000 was spent on the information campaign.

Scope of the Program

The public awareness campaign is multi-year and designed “to raise awareness about the life-saving potential of New Jersey’s Extreme Risk Protective Order (ERPO) law.”

“Anyone can take this simple, proactive step to stop gun-related deaths,” Attorney General Davenport said in the May release. “With the campaign we’re announcing today, we hope to make ERPOs as recognizable as domestic violence restraining orders. We want everyone to be able to recognize when an ERPO might be needed and then feel empowered to request one.”

Biden-Era Federal Funding, Due Process, and Abuse Protection

Davenport’s campaign was made possible through a 2022-2023 federal grant program. The grant allocated “$2,186,043 in funding” and made it “available to County Prosecutor’s offices.” The $2+ million the OAG carved out is hyper-focused on "red flag" law-related initiatives only — funds could be made available for a number of other qualifying programs and initiatives.

The grant came from the Biden-era Bipartisan Safer Communities Act through the Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program. Conditions of grant awards, per the law, state “extreme risk protection order programs” being considered “must include, at a minimum,” several protections.

Those protections include: “Pre-deprivation and post-deprivation due process rights that prevent any violation or infringement of the Constitution of the United States, including but not limited to the Bill of Rights,” and “pre-deprivation and post-deprivation heightened evidentiary standards and proof which mean not less than the protections afforded to a similarly situated litigant in Federal court or promulgated by the State’s evidentiary body, and sufficient to ensure the full protections of the Constitution of the United States, including but not limited to the Bill of Rights.”

The law further stipulates that “the heightened evidentiary standards and proof under such programs must, at all appropriate phases to prevent any violation of any constitutional right, at minimum, prevent reliance upon evidence that is unsworn or unaffirmed, irrelevant, based on inadmissible hearsay, unreliable, vague, speculative, and lacking a foundation; and … (have) penalties for abuse of the program.”

Program Details and Execution

The campaign rolled out in phases and “focus(ed) on educating the public about ERPOs, identifying available resources, and dispelling popular myths and misconceptions about the law.”

The ways the attorney general’s office spread its message on the red flag law are: Digital and social media platforms in both English and Spanish, billboards and bus shelters, on the radio, in video format, as well as translating the content into seven additional languages. The office also created a “one-stop shop” informational website.

A spokesperson for Attorney General Davenport’s office clarified where and how the program was executed. They said that the campaign and advertising placement decisions were made by the vendor they used.

“Streaming ads were placed by Nexxen using connected TV displays and online video platforms. Pandora was utilized for audio placements. Paid social ads were placed via Meta and Snapchat,” Attorney General Davenport’s office wrote in an email to Bearing Arms. “Web ads were placed via Google. Ads were placed at bus shelters in Barnegat, Fairview, Maywood, Newark, Paramus, Pennsauken, Trenton, Waretown, and Woodbridge, as well as on digital billboards in Hackensack, Marlboro, Newark, North Brunswick, Paramus, Parsippany, Piscataway, Toms River, Totowa, Trenton, Woodbridge, and Woodland Park.”

Records Request on the Program

A July 2026 Open Public Records Act request (W256952) — the New Jersey equivalent of a Freedom of Information Act request — requested records on the campaign.

Some of the records requested included any and all records relating to the claims made in one of their online campaign videos. The request asked for a factual basis in which their narrative came from such as case studies involving the people depicted in the film, documentation, scripts, and invoices. A request for records involving any actors paid to participate in the film. Records pertaining to statistics cited in the film were requested.

Portions of the OPRA were denied in part and granted in part. The request for any and all documentation was denied for being too broad and for seeking information rather than records.

Records Released

“Regarding your request for copies of scripts and invoices, you are being provided with copies of the scripts in English and Spanish and with copies of invoices,” the OAG Custodian of Records wrote. “Note, stock footage was used in the creation of the ads and actors were not utilized during this production. Further, be advised that that confidential financial information, such as account numbers and bank account routing numbers have been redacted pursuant to N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1.1 et seq.”

Cost & Line Items

Previously noted, the campaign cost $750,000. The contract was fulfilled by Success Advertising, a company that has done public relations work for the state in the past. The purchase order is dated Sept. 26, 2025. Davenport’s office corroborated that the $750,000 invoice represents all the fees associated with the 2026 campaign.

The line items are as follows:

• Media Placement Mark-Up Contract Year 1 (Not to Exceed 8 percent) — $18,906.45
• Pass Through Media Placement Mark-Up Contract Year 1 — $450,153.55
• Pass Through Media Production Contract Year 1 — $9,500
• Pass Through Non-Media Production Contract Year 1 — $158,625
• Senior Account Executive — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $3,450
• Account Executive - All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $12,000
• Public Relations Account Manager — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $24,000
• Comptroller — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $3,000
• Senior Art Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $13,225
• Creative Art Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $4,600
• Creative Copy Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $7,360
• Production Art Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate - Contract Year 1 — $4,600
• Production Media Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $8,280
• Marketing Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $9,500
• Interactive Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $9,200
• Social Media Director — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $4,000
• Traffic Manager — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $3,600
• Administrative Support — All-Inclusive Hourly Rate — Contract Year 1 — $6,000

The Scripts

Narratives told through these media spots were scripted. The video productions tell “stories” about survivors. In the radio spots, the narrative is about helping people in crisis by red flagging them.

The records request returned script copy for 30, 15, and 10 second radio and video spots in both English and Spanish.

30 Second Video Script

Because of an ERPO, Jacob graduated. Because of an ERPO, Mary has a chance to start over. Because of an ERPO, Chris and his platoon buddies continued to play cards. Because of an ERPO, they’re all still here. New Jersey’s Extreme Risk Protective Order (ERPO) temporarily removes firearms from individuals posing a danger to themselves or others. Give him tomorrow. Give her tomorrow. Give them tomorrow. Learn about ERPO today at erpo.nj.gov

30 Second Radio Script

If someone is in crisis and at risk of hurting themselves or others, an Extreme Risk Protective Order - ERPO – can temporarily restrict their access to firearms, giving them time to get help. In New Jersey, family, household members, and law enforcement can petition the court to issue an ERPO. An ERPO isn't permanent, and it isn't a punishment, but it is a proven lifesaving tool. Give them tomorrow. Learn about ERPO today at ERPO.nj.gov. ERPO.nj.gov.

More Questions & N.J. OAG Response

The OPRA included requests for statistics and factual statements on the claims made in the advertisements. The OAG Custodian of Records did not return any responsive records or any other data to support the claims made in the campaign nor discussed its origins.

“The names used in the ERPO campaign advertisements are not intended to represent actual individuals. Because ERPOs involve individuals who are in crisis, the specific circumstances of those petitions are carefully protected,” a spokesperson for Attorney General Davenport wrote in response to Bearing Arms’ query. “The legal requirement to disclose whether footage is stock or not is dependent on the license it was purchased under. The advertiser would need to comply with the terms of that license.”

When asked about protections from the weaponization of extreme risk protective orders, Davenport’s office said they’re built into existing New Jersey perjury law. However, they fell short in addressing a question on what level of due process respondents have.

“New Jersey law requires that petitions be sworn and under oath, so filing a false ERPO petition may be a criminal offense under the perjury and false swearing statutes (N.J.S.A. 2C:28-1(a) or N.J.S.A. 2C:28-2(a)),” a spokesperson wrote. “We are not able to provide advisory legal interpretations or legal opinions to reporters.”

“The New Jersey Office of the Attorney General takes a holistic approach to public safety, making use of proven tools – like our Extreme Risk Protective Order (ERPO) law – to protect our communities,” OAG Public Information Officer Tara Oliver wrote Bearing Arms. ”ERPO and similar ‘red flag’ laws have been enacted in 22 states, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Washington, D.C. and have been effective in helping to prevent gun-related tragedies.

“These laws only work when people use them, yet public awareness of ERPOs has lagged behind other kinds of protective orders. To remedy that, the Office of Alternative and Community Responses (OACR) within OAG used funding from a Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program (SCIP) Grant to familiarize New Jersey’s communities with the existence of ERPOs and how to obtain one.”

Was Weaponization of the Law Part of a Plan?

The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs is a 501(c)(7) social and recreational club and the official National Rifle Association state affiliate in N.J. ANJRPC has been engaged in Second Amendment preservation since its incorporation as a nonprofit in 1971.

The Association’s position on New Jersey’s red flag law is less complimentary than the attorney general’s.

"New Jersey's red flag law turns the U.S. Constitution on its head, allowing for the seizure of personal property with no notice or due process, based on even fabricated allegations, with no consequence to the person who may have fabricated them," ANJRPC Executive Director Scott Bach said. “This outcome was actually intended by the legislature, which enthusiastically passed this law even after we specifically testified about its unfair constitutional defects and suggested simple fixes to preserve due process.

“They wanted it like this — your guns get taken with no warning or explanation and you can argue about it later. And if someone with a vendetta lied under oath to make that happen, that's perfectly OK in the Garden State."

Fabricated allegations that Bach alluded to are reminiscent of the previously reported story of Kelly Sutliff. Sutliff is a survivor of a near-fatal domestic violence incident.

Sutliff’s then-husband used New Jersey’s extreme risk protective law against her. The application was a maneuver presumed to intimidate her, which he filed on the eve of Sutliff finalizing a final restraining order against him. Her legal battle took several years and thousands of dollars until her rights were fully restored.

Loss of Rights Over “One-Sided Allegations,” Says NRA

The National Rifle Association says that respondents are subject to losing their rights over allegations alone and the red flag law completely lacks due process. NRA Institute for Legislative Action Executive Director John Commerford says the threshold applicants need to meet in order to file a successful ERPO is very low.

“Being red-flagged under New Jersey’s law means your firearms can be seized and your Second Amendment rights suspended based on one-sided allegations, before you’ve had any chance to defend yourself,” Commerford told Bearing Arms. It’s a move that he says leaves “law-abiding citizens stigmatized, disarmed, and forced to fight in court just to reclaim what was taken from them.

“New Jersey’s ERPO process falls far short of real due process: it permits an ex parte temporary order and firearm seizure on a low ‘good cause’ standard, then requires only a preponderance of the evidence at a later hearing for an indefinite order — placing the burden on the citizen to fight to get their rights back.”

Commerford noted that the protections from false allegations New Jersey officials say are present, aren’t as black and white.

“New Jersey has no dedicated criminal penalty for knowingly filing a false or vindictive ERPO petition,” Commerford explained. “It relies on general perjury or false-swearing laws that are rarely a meaningful deterrent, leaving the process open to abuse in personal disputes.”

Is New Jersey’s ERPO Law a Civil Standard With Criminal Penalties?

The Second Amendment Foundation has been skeptical of New Jersey’s red flag law for years. An initiative launched by the Foundation named New Jersey as a jurisdiction ripe for challenge.

“SAF has been concerned about these statutes since they first started showing up,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said in a 2023 announcement. “We have already taken legal action against officials in Maryland for an egregious abuse of the law against a citizen in Dorchester County. But all of these laws should raise alarms because they prioritize citizen disarmament ahead of due process, and that can easily lead to deprivation of rights under color of law.”

The Foundation contends that these laws flip the presumption of innocence on its head. SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut noted that ERPO laws “essentially consider people guilty until they prove themselves innocent, a concept diametrically opposed to the way our criminal justice system is supposed to work, where the burden of proof is on the state, not the individual.”

“New Jersey’s ERPO law suffers from many of the legal infirmities common to the broader family of ‘red flag laws,’” SAF Senior Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack told Bearing Arms. “By characterizing the law as civil rather than criminal, the state has attempted to justify its purported authority to suspend the fundamental rights of its residents upon a finding of ‘good cause.’ Only after you’ve been visited by police and have had your rights stripped do you get your time in court to even learn the nature of the claims against you.

“This process flies in the face of the Constitution and treats the Second Amendment like the proverbial second-class right that the Supreme Court has already admonished gun grabbers for. There are penalties for making willfully false statements under oath in ERPO petitions but those are cold comfort for anyone facing a legal battle to reinstate their already-taken rights.”

The Future of the Program

Funds made available to New Jersey — and other states — via the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act are available until 2027. The $750 million allocated would be the total released via that law. Another law would need to be passed to appropriate future funding for the program.

New Jersey officials contend that the Extreme Risk Protective Order Act of 2018 is a “proven tool” and allows a “holistic approach to public safety.” Facially, critics of the law say it’s constitutionally dubious, at best. "New Jersey's flagrant disregard for constitutional rights will not last — it's only a matter of time until red flag — and many other laws like it — wind up in the trash bin of history,” ANJRPC’s Bach asserted.

Editor's Note: Do you appreciate Bearing Arms's in-depth reporting exposing the radical left and anti-gun efforts like New Jersey's push for "red flag" petitions? Support our work so we can keep bringing you the truth.

Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.