Supreme Court strikes New York gun law

6-3 decision likely means more can carry weapons

By: Jessica Gresko
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - In a major expansion of gun rights, the Supreme Court said Thursday [06/23/2022] that Americans have a right to carry firearms in public.
..... The justices' 6-3 decision follows a series of recent mass shootings and is expected to ultimately allow more people to legally carry guns on the streets of the nation's largest cities - including New York, Lost Angeles and Boston - and elsewhere. About a quarter of the U.S. population lives in stats expected to be affected by the ruling, the high court's first major gun decision in more than a decade.
..... The ruling comes as Congress is working toward passage of gun legislation following mass shootings in Texas, New York and California.
..... Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority that the constitution protects "an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home."
..... In their decision, the justices struck down a New York law requiring people to demonstrate a particular need for carrying a gun in oder to get a license to carry one in public. The justice said that requirement violates the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms."
..... California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island all have similar laws. The Biden administration had urged the justices to uphold New York's law.
..... President Joe Biden said in a statement he was "deeply disappointed" by the ruling. It "contradicts both common sens and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all, he said.
..... He urged states to pass new laws. "I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the line," he said.
..... New York Governor Kathy Hochul said the decision comes at a particularly painful time, when New York is still mounting the deaths of 10 people in mass shouting at a supermarket in Buffalo. "This decision isn't just reckless. It;s reprehensible . It's not what New Yorkers want," she said.
..... Gun control groups called the decision a significant setback. Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice and an expert on the Second Amendment wrote on Twitter that the decision could be the biggest expansion of gun rights" by the Supreme Court in U.S. history.
..... Republican lawmakers were among those cheering the decision.
..... In a dissent joined by his liberal colleagues, Justice Stephen Breyer focused on the toll taken by gun violence. "Since the start of this year alone, (2022), there have already been 277 reported mass shootings - an average of more than one per day," Breyer wrote.
..... Several other conservative justices who joined Thomas' majority opinion also wrote separately to add their views.
..... Justice Samuel Alito criticized Breyer's dissent, questioning the relevance of his discussion of mass shootings and other gun death statistics. Alito wrote that the court had decided "nothing about who may lawfully posses a fireman or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun" and nothing "about the kinds of weapons that people may possess."
..... "Today, [06/23/2022] unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear they will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves." The Second Amendment, he said, "guarantees their right to do so."
..... Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by chief Justice John Roberts, noted the limits of the decision. States can still require people to get a license to carry a gun, Kavanaugh wrote, and condition that license on "fingerprinting, a background check, a mental health record check, and training in firearms handling and in law regarding the use of force, among other possible requirements."
..... Backers of New York's law had argued that striking it down would lead to more guns on the streets and higher rates of violent crime. Gun violence, which was already on the rise during the coronavirus pandemic, has spiked anew.
..... In most of the country, gun owners have little difficulty legally carrying their weapons in public. But that had been harder to do in New York and the handful of states with similar laws. New York's law, which has been harder in public, a person applying for a license has to show "proper cause, a specific need to carry the weapon.
..... The state issued unrestricted licenses where a person can carry a gun anywhere and restricted licenses that allow people to carry a weapon but just for specific purposes such as hunting and target shooting or to and from tier place of business.
..... the Supreme Court last issued a major gun decision in 2010. In that decision and a ruling form 2008, the justices established a nationwide right to keep a gun at home for self-defense. The question for the court this time was about carnying one outside the home.
..... The challenge to the New York law was brought by the New York state Rifle & Pistol Association, which describes itself as the nation's oldest firearms advocacy organization, and two men seeking an unrestricted ability to carry guns outside their homes.
..... Tom King, president of the association, said he was relieved.
..... "The lawful and legal gun owner of New York State is no longer going to be persecuted by laws that have nothing to do with the safety of the people and will do nothing to make the people safer," he said. "And maybe now we'll stat going after criminals and perpetrators of these heinous acts.
..... The court's decision is somewhat out of step with public opinion. About half of voters in the 2020 presidential election said gun laws in the U.S. should be made more strict, according to AP VoteCast, an expansive survey of the electorate. An additional third said laws should be kept as they are, while only about 1 in 10 said gun laws should be less strict.
..... About 8 in 10 Democratic voters said gun laws should be made more strict,VoteCase showed. Among Republican voters, roughly half said laws should be kept as they are, roughly half said laws should be divided between more and less strict.
..... Other Thursday [06/23/2022] rulings:

* The Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement officers can't be sued when they violate the rights of criminal suspects by failing to provide the familiar Miranda warning before questioning them.
..... The justices ruled 6-3 in favor of a sheriff's deputy who was sued after he failed to read a Miranda warning - "You have the right to remain silent,: it begins - to a Los Angeles hospital worker accused of sexually assaulting a patient.
..... The issue in the case was whether the warning given to criminal suspects before they talk to authorities, which the court recognized in tits Miranda v. Arizona decision in 1966 and reaffirmed 34 years later is a constitutional right or something less important and less defined

* The Supreme Court gave Republican legislative leaders in North Carolina a win in an ongoing fight over fight state's latest photo identification voting law.

HOME