[monkey]

Held: New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. Pp. 8–63.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

 

[Depiazzy]

This is a major win for us

 

[Chris828]

So with this ruling does it change anything for someone with a restricted permit? Sure would be nice not having to spend money on one of their approved courses just to potentially have your permit restrictions dropped with no guarantee.

 

[Bsstuff1]

Sorry I know this has been in talks for a while now can someone explain in short what this means and what it means for someone with a nyc premise permit.
Thanks

 

[OwnTheRide]

I wouldn't get too excited... we are going to get fucked by this.

The governor is now talking about calling a special session with the legislature. Does anyone really believe that the NY legislature is going to revamp gun law and we're going to come out of it better than we are today? They are going to load up the laws with all kinds of things that will screw us over six ways from Sunday.

It was the right decision, but don't fool yourselves into thinking this will be a net positive for us.

 

[ResidentJew]

I wouldn't get too excited... we are going to get fucked by this.

The governor is now talking about calling a special session with the legislature. Does anyone really believe that the NY legislature is going to revamp gun law and we're going to come out of it better than we are today? They are going to load up the laws with all kinds of things that will screw us over six ways from Sunday.

It was the right decision, but don't fool yourselves into thinking this will be a net positive for us.

Absolutely agree 100%. I foresee a huge push into "sensitive places" restrictions and increased penalties for "violations" thereof. As annoying as the entire system was, we had licenses for life (even with the state police recert in 2013, which is free and easy) and extremely few time and place restrictions relative to other states with very open gun laws (surprising but true). I don't agree with any part of the Sullivan Act, but this is going to instigate a lot of trouble, even if it has the potential to eventually turn out for the better in 10 years.

I anticipate they're going to revamp the entire licensing system with all sorts of training requirements, costs, regular reapplications, etc. It's going to be a big legal battle moving forward. The idea that you can license a right is beyond my comprehension because it's a paradox.

I'm glad to finally be moving out of this trash hole in a year. It's been a long time coming.

 

[dck22]

I can see it coming that NYC, Westchester and Suffolk counties will be "sensitive places" for all license holders in upstate.

 

[TonyD81]

Why be a ne

I wouldn't get too excited... we are going to get fucked by this.

The governor is now talking about calling a special session with the legislature. Does anyone really believe that the NY legislature is going to revamp gun law and we're going to come out of it better than we are today? They are going to load up the laws with all kinds of things that will screw us over six ways from Sunday.

It was the right decision, but don't fool yourselves into thinking this will be a net positive for us.

Why be a negative Nancy? This is huge as it attacks the Sullivan act. Hochul speech revealed to the country that she is a moron. The legislature can write up law after law but they would all be in violation of the scotus ruling. If that is what they want so be it. Then no one has to follow a scotus ruling. Then let the sbr and sbs be sold without a tax stamp.

 

[[email protected]]

Everyone seems to be pretty negative considering what was achieved today. Yes the details will take time to iron out but at the end of the day the right to carry will be the law of the land. In the mean time keep your powder dry and obey the rules. Thank you to the Supreme Court!

 

[J Will]

Held: New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. Pp. 8–63.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

Does this say that a permit is a permit...no restrictions can be placed on it??

 

[wabuskey]

The decision upheld the right to carry a pistol for self defense. As such, any new permit laws will have to be shall issue as opposed to may issue. Permits will not be able to be restricted for anything less than full carry. The Court specifically stated that the entire City can't be declared a sensitive area. The legislature and Gov. may try to jerk us around but if they violate the very plain decision of the Court they will get beat down again. With the directive of the Court to the lower appellate courts, I doubt it would even make it to the SCOTUS again. They would be defeated in the lower courts or else the lower courts would get reamed a new one by the SCOTUS.

Do as I did today and write your Assemblyman and State Senator and encourage them to read the full Court's decision and to abide by their ruling when drafting any new pistol permit laws. Also, tell them that any such new permits must be good Statewide.

 

[Bullseye]

It seems that NYSRPA v Bruen presented the issue of the plaintiffs (Nash and Koch) taking a handgun outside of the home, as opposed to the issue of whether NY's "may issue" policy is, itself, unconstitutional. From the actual case, the Court presents the question in both a long, and a "boiled down" form, specifically:

QUESTION PRESENTED
New York prohibits its ordinary law-abiding
citizens from carrying a handgun outside the home
without a license, and it denies licenses to every
citizen who fails to convince the state that he or she
has “proper cause” to carry a firearm. In District of
Columbia v. Heller, this Court held that the Second
Amendment protects “the individual right to possess
and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” 554 U.S.
570, 592 (2008), and in McDonald v. City of Chicago,
the Court held that this right “is fully applicable to the
States,” 561 U.S. 742, 750 (2010). For more than a
decade since then, numerous courts of appeals have
squarely divided on this critical question: whether the
Second Amendment allows the government to deprive
ordinary law-abiding citizens of the right to possess
and carry a handgun outside the home. This circuit
split is open and acknowledged, and it is squarely
presented by this petition, in which the Second Circuit
affirmed the constitutionality of a New York regime
that prohibits law-abiding individuals from carrying a
handgun unless they first demonstrate some form of
“proper cause” that distinguishes them from the body
of “the people” protected by the Second Amendment.
The time has come for this Court to resolve this critical
constitutional impasse and reaffirm the citizens’
fundamental right to carry a handgun for self-defense.

Here's the issue, as "boiled down" by the Court, and appearing immediately after the above text block:

"The question presented is:

Whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit ordinary law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense."

Source: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-843/164031/20201217110211298_2020-12-17%20NRA-Corlett%20Cert%20Petition%20FINAL.pdf

And the media around this case has, for years, talked like we already have the right to have handguns in the home, i.e., premises permits. That has frustrated and confounded me, because NY's "may issue" policy prevents far too many from even possessing a handgun--at all--let alone "carrying" it, concealed or otherwise, in public.

Yet in Thoma's decision of June 23, 2022, he cited part of the second amendment, specifically "...the right to keep and bear arms...." (I added the bold/emphasis--the entire 2a amendment is below, for reference, with my question below that.)

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

My question is: HOW do are we supposed to exercise our rights under the Constitution's "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment (cited by Thomas in the latest NYSPRA ruling) if NY is going to continue requiring us to first get a pistol permit of any kind?

I just saw Hochul on TV saying she's going to beef up NY's "permitting laws" so they're "...legal but right up to the edge of the Supreme Court's ruling..." (not an exact quote), because she considers Thomas's decision "reprehensible."

Not everyone has lived in the same area long enough to have four references, known to them for at least five years, etc..., to vouch for them.

Do you folks see the four references for five years requirement going away, or getting even more difficult, along with whatever else Hochul's legal eagles can dream up?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Jimbo1227]

Held: New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. Pp. 8–63.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

Held: New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. Pp. 8–63.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

So with a NYS permit are we going to be able to carry in the city?

 

[wabuskey]

So with a NYS permit are we going to be able to carry in the city?

As of right now, I would say yes it does as NY's law was struck down. However, that doesn't mean you wouldn't get arrested. That's a question for an attorney.

 

[ResidentJew]

It seems that NYSRPA v Bruen presented the issue of the plaintiffs (Nash and Koch) taking a handgun outside of the home, as opposed to the issue of whether NY's "may issue" policy is, itself, unconstitutional. From the actual case, the Court presents the question in both a long, and a "boiled down" form, specifically:



Here's the issue, as "boiled down" by the Court, and appearing immediately after the above text block:


Source: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-843/164031/20201217110211298_2020-12-17%20NRA-Corlett%20Cert%20Petition%20FINAL.pdf

And the media around this case has, for years, talked like we already have the right to have handguns in the home, i.e., premises permits. That has frustrated and confounded me, because NY's "may issue" policy prevents far too many from even possessing a handgun--at all--let alone "carrying" it, concealed or otherwise, in public.

Yet in Thoma's decision of June 23, 2022, he cited part of the second amendment, specifically "...the right to keep and bear arms...." (I added the bold/emphasis--the entire 2a amendment is below, for reference, with my question below that.)


My question is: HOW do are we supposed to exercise our rights under the Constitution's "equal protection clause" of the 14th Amendment (cited by Thomas in the latest NYSPRA ruling) if NY is going to continue requiring us to first get a pistol permit of any kind?

I just saw Hochul on TV saying she's going to beef up NY's "permitting laws" so they're "...legal but right up to the edge of the Supreme Court's ruling..." (not an exact quote), because she considers Thomas's decision "reprehensible."

Not everyone has lived in the same area long enough to have four references, known to them for at least five years, etc..., to vouch for them.

Do you folks see the four references for five years requirement going away, or getting even more difficult, along with whatever else Hochul's legal eagles can dream up?

Thanks in advance.

It's going to get more obscene and obnoxious here before it gets better. The only way to deal with this, legally speaking, is to challenge every single component of the laws both current and future. They're not going to let this go, and they're not going to let it happen easily. First major step was a success, though. We need to take the approach that you cannot license a right and push that to its absolute maximum.

 

[Hypochondriac]

So if I understand correctly, this means you should now be able to carry in NYC with just the premise permit. However it does nothing to make getting a premise permit any easier or cheaper? It might actually make getting a premise permit in NYC harder since now it will double as carry permit?

I'm kind of glad it will be easier for law abiding people to now own a gun, but If it results in more guns entering NYC, I foresee gun crime/violence also rising.

 

[Oldtimer]

The way I've heard some lawyers say that this ruling made the special need cause null. So restrictions should be gone soon. Also, in this ruling Justice Thomas stated courts can no longer use a 2nd tier approach and will have to use strict scrutiny on cases. Meaning lower courts can't use what they feel is the public safety excuse anymore. Sensitive places was also mentioned and the Justice said only places like previous laws like no schools, federal buildings can be used. He saw that one coming. I do think though the governor will try to make commercial properties put no guns signs up to deter people from carrying and making it a felony if you are caught.I see lawsuits about this coming. I'm no lawyer but i did sleep at a holiday inn last night Good Luck everyone and keep the fight!

 

[Bullseye]

So the State has been busy, and already published info based on the latest NYSPRA ruling. Here is a portion, with a link--hopefully, this will spur additional, fruitful discussion.

Again, there is more there than what I posted, below, but I found these two parts particularly interesting:

"The most common types of firearm licenses are: (a) Carry concealed (b) Possess on Premises and (c) Possess/Carry During Employment. There is a possibility that these categories might change as a result of the Bruen ruling."

...In New York State, licenses are often issued by county licensing entities. It is possible that this process could change moving forward.
(I added the bold fonts, above, but did not add any of the bolding in the quote I posted below--the State bolded some items.)

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the United States Supreme Court’s ruling about New York State’s “concealed carry” law?

• On June 23, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling struck down a more than 100 year old law that required an individual to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to be able to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm.
• 
  
• According to the ruling, New York State’s existing law has been deemed unconstitutional because it gives too much discretion to the State and its licensing officers in determining “proper cause.”

So, is New York’s law overturned? Can I carry a concealed weapon without a permit?

• Nothing in the Supreme Court decision allows anyone to immediately legally carry a concealed firearm in New York State without obtaining the currently-required permits or licenses.
• 
  
• This also means you cannot legally carry a concealed firearm outside of your home in New York State if you only have a license to possess a gun in your home.

What does this ruling mean for license or permit application processes?

• As of June 23, the application process to obtain a license or permit to carry a firearm in New York State is unchanged.
• 
  
• Though it is ultimately State law that dictates how firearm licenses are issued, the State has designated the application processes to counties (or in some cases, cities).
• 
  
• Those who want to change their permit status to get an “unrestricted conceal carry” permit must file an application with their designated local licensing authority.
• 
  
• For example, in New York City, this would be the NYPD.

What happens next?

• The U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the State of New York will be able to continue to require licenses for concealed firearms, so long as the license requirements clearly lay out who can carry, where they can (and cannot) carry, and the types of firearms residents might have access to. The State can also restrict the carrying of firearms in sensitive locations and otherwise restrict the manner of carrying firearms.

What actions is New York State taking in response to this ruling?

• It is Governor Hochul’s top priority to ensure that New Yorkers are safe and kept out of danger.
• 
  
• Governor Hochul’s Administration is working closely with the State legislature, county and local leaders, as well as legal experts, to ensure that the State enacts laws and create rules that conform with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision while also ensuring that the ability to access or use firearms is restricted and carefully regulated.

How does New York State’s firearm licensing system currently work? What is likely to change?

• A firearm license is a State-regulated license, and nothing in the Bruen ruling suggests that the State does not have the authority to issue licenses or determine licensing requirements.
• 
  
• In New York State, licenses are often issued by county licensing entities. It is possible that this process could change moving forward.
• 
  
• Currently, an applicant must decide what type of license they would like to apply for.
• 
  
• The most common types of firearm licenses are: (a) Carry concealed (b) Possess on Premises and (c) Possess/Carry During Employment. There is a possibility that these categories might change as a result of the Bruen ruling.
• 
  
• At this time, the cost to obtain different licenses varies by county (or in some cases, city), as does the time it takes to obtain a license. At this time, the average processing time for license applications is six (6) months.
• 
  
• Prior to June 23, 2022, in order to be eligible to have a firearms license, an individual in New York State must have demonstrated that they are:
  • A New York State resident;
  • at least 21 years old;
  • have no prior felony or serious offense convictions;
  • be of “good moral character,”; and
  • have a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm.
• As of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling, only the proper cause requirement to conceal carry is no longer applicable and ordinary citizens are deemed to have a self-defense basis for applying for a concealed carry permit.
  Link: Apply for a Firearms License

 

[MRBESQ]

Held: New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. Pp. 8–63.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

It seems that if you already have been issued a restricted permit allowing you to carry to and from hunting and target practice, that restriction is now deemed unconstitutional, possibly converting your license to a full carry, at least until NY further conditions permitting. You were issued a restricted license because you could not show a special need for a full carry. That is now gone. Hence, your permit should, constitutionally, automatically convert to full carry. I agree with other posters. NY may rescind ALL licenses and come up with an extremely burdensome set of new restrictions to force new permits issued to have more ridiculous restrictions.

 

[battmigliore]

A quote from the previously linked NY.gov website:

So, is New York’s law overturned? Can I carry a concealed weapon without a permit?

• Nothing in the Supreme Court decision allows anyone to immediately legally carry a concealed firearm in New York State without obtaining the currently-required permits or licenses.
• This also means you cannot legally carry a concealed firearm outside of your home in New York State if you only have a license to possess a gun in your home.

So, looks like we will most likely have to submit and wait quite a while for an amendment.