New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. New York
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2019 7:26 am
This case is the first Second Amendment challenge to a draconian gun control law to be heard by SCOTUS in nine years. It will likely come before the Court in October. Bloomberg-types are already crying that it will lead to national concealed carry and will make the whole country like Texas.
Let's hope they're right!
The Basics: The case involves a New York City measure that forbids residents from removing their firearms from their homes, unless they’re taking them to an “authorized small arms range” or “shooting club” within city limits. Several residents challenged the law’s constitutionality, arguing that the Second Amendment protects their right to carry guns to other shooting ranges, competitions, and second homes outside the city. In 2018, the Second Circuit upheld the rule, noting that it does not “substantially affect the exercise of core Second Amendment rights”—self-defense with a firearm in the home.
The Implications: District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) affirmed the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. New York will, for the first time, extend the Second Amendment beyond the front door.
Gun-grabber take:
Originalist take:
Let's hope they're right!
The Basics: The case involves a New York City measure that forbids residents from removing their firearms from their homes, unless they’re taking them to an “authorized small arms range” or “shooting club” within city limits. Several residents challenged the law’s constitutionality, arguing that the Second Amendment protects their right to carry guns to other shooting ranges, competitions, and second homes outside the city. In 2018, the Second Circuit upheld the rule, noting that it does not “substantially affect the exercise of core Second Amendment rights”—self-defense with a firearm in the home.
The Implications: District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) affirmed the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. New York will, for the first time, extend the Second Amendment beyond the front door.
Gun-grabber take:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/201 ... eller.htmlOnce the Second Amendment is extended beyond the home, public-carry bans generally will be the next to fall. Lower courts, now packed with pro-gun Trump nominees, will swiftly tear down restrictions on concealed and open carry. A central premise of Heller and McDonald—that the Second Amendment protects handguns “in the home”—will be cast aside. New York State Rifle will be the first shot in a coming constitutional revolution.
Originalist take:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/2019012 ... ontrol-lawThe bizarre and unique nature of this regulation – apparently the only one of its kind in the nation – and the exceedingly thin “public safety” justification for it potentially make the case low-hanging fruit for another positive Second Amendment ruling.
But whether the Supreme Court will use the occasion to bring lower court defiance of the Second Amendment to heel or simply to rule narrowly on this particular regulation remains to be seen.
The development does, however, underscore the importance to gun owners of President Trump’s appointments to the high court, including Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brent Kavanaugh.
Unlike Kennedy, Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are committed originalists, the same mode of judicial interpretation that the late Justice Antonin Scalia used in authoring the Heller opinion. Fidelity to that method and to the court’s opinions in Heller and McDonald are the surest guarantees we can have that the Second Amendment will get the respect it is due by the U.S. Supreme Court.
