Even after The Supreme Court’s landmark Bruen ruling many states have found ways to work around Supreme Court precedent and drastically restrict the ability of law-abiding people to carry firearms to protect themselves. The Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) was passed in Albany on November 7, 2022 after the Supreme Court rebuked the state’s may-issue concealed carry permitting scheme. When only 7 of 50 states (California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island) have unconstitutional laws strictly regulating the 2nd amendment while the other 43 don’t, those 7 states need to remove their unconstitutional laws. The Bruen ruling at the least says that.
The Bruen ruling states:
The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self-defense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public. Pp. 62–63.
The Supreme Court has started to receive AMICUS CURIAE Briefs for Ivan Antonyuk, et al., Petitioners v.Steven G. James, In His Official Capacity as Acting Superintendent of New York State Police, et al now Case No. 23-910. New York tried to nullify the Bruen ruling with the CCIA. The questions presented for review by the Supreme Court are:
- Whether the proper historical time period for ascertaining the Second Amendment’s original meaning is 1791, rather than 1868; and
- Whether “the people” must convince government officials of their “good moral character” before exercising their Second Amendment right to bear arms in public.
On Feb 27 2024 a motion to extend the time to file a response was granted and the time is extended to and including May 9, 2024, for all respondents. Briefs have already been filed by New York State Sheriffs’ Association Inc., Foundation for Moral Law, Second Amendment Law Center, Peace Officers Research Association of California and National Rifle Association of America. You can follow Case No. 23-910 on the SCOTUS website. This was the result of Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.
It is important to know the laws of the state you are in before carrying a firearm. For now, it’s important to be aware of any changes. The Supreme Court’s decision on this case can once and for all restore the second amendment from “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” to the constitutional right it was meant to be.
UPDATE – 05/21/2024
Case No. 23-910 Ivan Antonyuk, et al., Petitioners v.Steven G. James, In His Official Capacity as Acting Superintendent of New York State Police has been scheduled for SCOTUS Conference of 6/6/2024.
UPDATE – 06/28/2024
Case No. 23-910 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 07/1/2024.
UPDATE – 07/02/2024
Case No. 23-910 Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of United States v. Rahimi, 602 U. S. ___ (2024).
UPDATE – 10/24/2024
Washington, D.C. – Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) spokesmen issued the following statements after the Second Circuit once again largely upheld New York’s poorly named “Concealed Carry Improvement Act” earlier today.
