Blue state gun laws on cutting board by Supreme Court decision

“States will have to move to a so-called ‘must issue’ rather than ‘may issue’ system, which means you can apply for that, you don’t have to have personal, specific needs like I was threatened or I’m a security guard.” said Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York Law University. His book The Second Amendment: A Biography has been cited in Disagreement by Judge Stephen Breuer.

New York City law, in place since 1913, required residents to show good cause to carry concealed weapons in public in self-defense. Similarly, in other “May” states – although each state’s law takes a different approach – local officials can decide whether a person should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. On Thursday, judges said New York law violated the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

As for New York, where Hochul and other state leaders have already vowed to take action in response to the court ruling, Waldman said lawmakers could try to respond by restricting places where people can carry these weapons, such as subways, schools or the Times. square. . Legislators may also consider other permit requirements, such as background checks.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh noted in a concurring opinion Thursday that the 43 states with licensing regimes are not prohibited from imposing licensing requirements. Thursday’s decision only affects discretionary licensing regimes, also known as “May Grant” regimes, he said.

Kavanaugh said the states with the most stringent licensing requirements could continue to limit these permits if the criteria match those of states that “should issue.” About a third of the states take the form of a mandatory issuance law, giving government officials some leeway when it comes to accepting or denying weapons applications. But half the states allow Americans to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

“It’s important to note that these state laws come in various forms and don’t always fall into one category or another when it comes to extradite or extradite regimes,” Esther Sanchez-Gomez, Senior Litigation Attorney at Giffords. The Legal Center said Thursday during a press conference, complicating the meaning of the court’s decision.

The National Rifle Association has been fighting the May laws for 40 years and called Thursday’s decision a “monumental victory” while noting that “many unconstitutional gun control laws remain” in the US.

“Today’s ruling has established that the right to carry does not disappear at a person’s front door, but many unconstitutional gun control laws remain in America. The NRA will continue to fight these laws until every law-abiding American can exercise their right to protect themselves and their families with the firearm of their choice,” the group said in a statement.

The full coverage of the ordinance remains to be seen, Waldman said, but Americans should expect the NRA and other gun rights groups to launch a flood of legal challenges over rules such as the assault weapons ban or background checks.

“What this really means is that the NRA and gun rights advocates will remake and go to court tomorrow challenging hundreds of gun laws across the United States,” Waldman said. “It will be very difficult for states, cities and Congress to know what is allowed right now, what rules or firearms are even constitutional? The court did not clarify here from the point of view of New York law.

%d bloggers like this: