The Supreme Court has decided to take up a gun rights case for the first time in nine years, this time a challenge to New York City’s law that prevents lawful gun permit holders from transporting their unloaded, locked up weapons outside the city limits.
The city residents who launched the original lawsuit wanted to practice shooting at target ranges outside the city or transport their firearms to second homes elsewhere in the state, but the city wouldn’t let them do what they wanted with their property.
Members of the pro-Second Amendment majority on the Supreme Court may be looking to flex their muscles.
The fact that the high court decided Jan. 22 to grant certiorari, or review, in the case obviously does not guarantee the court will overturn the New York City law, but it seems to suggest that the originalist, pro-gun rights justices who form a majority on the court are seriously considering reining in the law.
Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, a veteran of Second Amendment battles, has urged the high court to expand on the constitutional gun rights it articulated in District of Columbia v. Heller (2010), which protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm, and McDonald v. Chicago (2012) which holds the right of an individual to “keep and bear arms” is constitutionally incorporated, or made applicable, to the states.
Clement said the Big Apple case “is a perfect vehicle to reaffirm that those decisions and the constitutional text have consequences.” Seventeen states back the case and have urged the Supreme Court to overturn the New York City law.
In June 2016, the court refused to hear a challenge to the classification of various firearms as “assault weapons” by New York and Connecticut. In November 2017 the court declined to hear a challenge to Maryland’s assault weapons ban.
“As part of a sweeping set of gun control proposals that are currently under consideration in New York State,” Cooke said, “a Brooklyn-based state representative named Kevin Parker has proposed a measure that, if enacted into law, would require anyone in New York applying for a handgun to hand over their social media username and password to the police.”
Americans need to pay attention to the proposal law because, “If New York passes this measure, it will essentially have nullified the Second Amendment within its borders.”
New York City has some of the most draconian gun laws in the nation.
This means permit holders are not allowed to transport a handgun to any place outside the city’s limits—even when the handgun is unloaded and locked in a container separate from its ammunition, and even when the owner seeks to transport it to a shooting range outside the city or to a second home in order to use it for self-defense.
Although the city claims the oppressive transport ban promotes public safety by limiting handguns on city streets, it has provided no actual evidence the regulation contributes to public safety, according to the summary.
“Moreover, even if there were such a risk, the City’s restriction poses greater safety risks by encouraging residents who are leaving town to leave their handguns behind in vacant homes, and it serves only to increase the frequency of handgun transport within city limits by forcing many residents to use an in city range rather than more convenient ranges elsewhere,” the summary stated.
A date for oral arguments in the gun rights case has not yet been scheduled by the Supreme Court.
