Handgun carriage law in New York: High Court upholds requirement of 'good moral character'
Unleashing the Latest on NY's Gun Laws: The Supreme Court's Light-handed Approach
In a recent twist, the Supreme Court put forth a non-committal verdict on Monday, leaving New York's stringent gun laws intact. The decision serves as a triumph for state officials and pro-gun control groups, who have been grappling with the ramifications of a landmark 2022 Supreme Court ruling that broadened the public carrying of guns.
The disputed New York law under scrutiny in this case was devised as a reaction to the aforementioned 2022 decision. Echoing this earlier precedent, the current case hinges on whether American residents should be required to display "good moral character" to start a journey with a firearm. The Supreme Court's decision to steer clear of this argument leaves the majority of the state's restrictions on carrying weapons in so-called "sensitive" areas, such as schools, parks, and theaters, intact.
The "good moral character" stipulation demands that applicants for a firearm license demonstrate an essential character, temperament, and judgment that justifies the responsibility of weapon possession, never endangering oneself or others. The legislation also outlines several "sensitive" zones where weapons are banned. Included in this list are government buildings, schools, hospitals, stadiums, and Times Square. The future of this strategy under legal scrutiny has sparked keen interest among other states.
Gun rights advocates contesting the law allege that the sweep of "sensitive" places covers "nearly the entire New York landmass," making weapon carriage so precarious that even the most law-abiding permit holders would hesitate. The lawsuit was initiated by five New York residents with firearm licenses and one individual who asserts the law has deterred him from seeking a permit.
Initially presented before the Supreme Court in January, the appeal has previously found itself in the limelight of the court's deliberations, heavily influenced by its decisions. This case significantly relies on the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which overturned New York's "proper cause" mandate for licensing concealed carry outside the home. Pro-gun control groups contend that New York is attempting to bypass the high court's ruling in Bruen.
Among the recent inaction of the Supreme Court in similar appeals since the Bruen decision, this current decision marks another instance of the justices' cautious approach. The justices have been contemplating several other Second Amendment appeals in recent weeks, including one concerning Maryland's ban on specific semi-automatic rifles.
Besides discarding New York's law at the time, the Supreme Court established a historical standard for reviewing gun prohibitions in its 2022 decision. In order to pass judicial scrutiny, the court ruled, a gun law must have some historical connection to gun regulations that were common during the nation's founding. The guidance provided by this ruling has generated considerable confusion in lower courts regarding the extent of the connection required.
The Supreme Court attempted to bring clarity to the matter with a decision last year when it upheld a federal law that prevents people under certain domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms. However, after looking into the New York case in light of this decision on restraining orders, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld most of the state's law last fall. Notwithstanding this, it did permit a lower court order to hold force, blocking the enforcement of the state's ban on carrying concealed weapons in particular privately owned retail establishments, such as supermarkets and restaurants.
Adding Depth:
- The recent Supreme Court decision comes after New York enacted the Concealed Carry Improvement Act in response to the 2022 New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen decision that struck down New York's "proper cause" requirement for issuing concealed carry permits. The act includes provisions on "good moral character," sensitive places, and restrictions on private property.
- The Concealed Carry Improvement Act's original provision restricting the carriage of weapons onto private property without the owner's explicit permission was struck down by the appeals court.
- In light of the Supreme Court's decision not to review the case, New York's requirements for "good moral character" and restrictions on carrying handguns in sensitive places remain active, while the appeals court challenges the requirement for handgun license applicants to reveal their social media account information and the enforcement of the provision restricting the carriage of concealed weapons on private property without permission.
- The Supreme Court's recent decision has left intact New York's Concealed Carry Improvement Act, which—in response to the 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen—established requirements for 'good moral character' and restrictions on carrying firearms in 'sensitive' areas, such as schools, parks, and theaters.
- The 2022 Supreme Court decision also ruled that for a gun law to pass judicial scrutiny, it must have a historical connection to common gun regulations during the nation's founding, a ruling that has led to considerable confusion in lower courts regarding the extent of the connection required.
- In early 2023, the Supreme Court—in a move some call cautious—decided not to review the New York case, and among its subsequent inaction in several Second Amendment appeals, this decision marks another instance of the court refraining from making a definitive stance on firearm regulations, particularly in regards to political issues like the 'Concealed Carry Improvement Act' and the type of firearms under consideration, such as certain semi-automatic rifles.
