U.S. Supreme Court conservatives take aim at New York gun limits

• Plaintiffs say the law violates gun rights in the constitution
• Largest extension of US gun rights since 2010 likely
• Liberal judges alarmed over “gun-related chaos”

WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 (Reuters) – Conservative justices of the U.S. Supreme Court appeared ready on Wednesday to lift New York state restrictions on the carrying of concealed handguns in public in a major gun rights case involving various gun restrictions at national level.

Some of the Conservative judges shared their skepticism about the constitutionality of state law, but expressed concern about how a ruling that overturns it could affect gun bans in sensitive locations such as schools, sports stadiums, and crowded public gatherings.

The court heard arguments for about two hours in an appeal by two gun owners and the New York subsidiary of the National Rifle Association, an influential gun rights group closely affiliated with Republicans, against a lower court ruling breaking state law contest. Issued in 1913.

New York requires people to provide a “correct reason” for carrying concealed handguns – including actual, non-speculative self-defense needs – in order to obtain permission from a state gun certification officer.

“Why is it not good enough to say, ‘I live in a violent area and I want to defend myself'” asked Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

Lower courts rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the law violated the right of the second amendment to the US Constitution to keep and carry guns. The challengers seek an unrestricted right to carry concealed small arms in public. The state currently approves most of the applications for unrestricted licenses.

The Conservative Supreme Court majority of 6: 3 is considered benevolent for a broader view of Amendment 2 rights in a country with high levels of gun violence that President Joe Biden has described as a “national embarrassment”.

Unrestricted undercover licenses are more freely issued in rural areas of the state than in densely populated New York City. Conservative judges found this inadmissible.

“How many raids are there in the forest?” Chief Justice John Roberts asked New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, who was defending the law.

Judge Samuel Alito wondered why only “celebrities, state judges and retired police officers” should be able to carry concealed weapons, rather than ordinary citizens.

Underwood stressed the need to regulate concealed weapons to promote public safety, saying the proliferation of firearms in the New York City subway system “terrifies many people”.

Alito said there are already people illegally carrying guns on subways and streets. “But the ordinary hard-working, law-abiding people … they can’t be armed?” asked Alito.

A ruling overturning New York law would raise legal questions about how and when local governments can regulate firearms in sensitive locations.

A view shows the gable of the US Supreme Court building in Washington, DC, USA, June 25, 2021. REUTERS / Ken Cedeno / File Photo

Continue reading

Liberal and Conservative judges challenged Paul Clement to represent the challenger where guns might be banned in this scenario, including government buildings, public transportation, sports stadiums, schools, university campuses, protest venues and drinking halls.

Clement said bans in government buildings and schools would likely pass muster, but others would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Conservative judge Amy Coney Barrett said states have banned guns in sensitive locations throughout history.

“Can’t we just say that Times Square is a sensitive place on New Year’s Eve because… people are on top of each other – we’ve had violence, so we judge it’s a sensitive place? “Barrett asked Clement, referring to the jam-packed annual celebration.

“WHAT-RELATED CHAOS”

The case could result in the most important gun law ruling in more than a decade. The court first recognized a person’s right to keep weapons at home for self-defense in 2008 and applied that right to states in 2010.

The court’s three liberals have signaled concerns about the extension of gun rights.

Establishing guns are dangerous, Liberal Judge Stephen Breyer envisioned situations where even people of “good moral character”, including drunk fans at the sports stadium, “could end up dead”. Breyer challenged Clement on what the court should do to avoid “some kind of gun-related chaos”.

After being denied full licenses, gun owners Robert Nash and Brandon Koch, along with the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, sued in federal court.

New York has cited analogous arms restrictions that range from medieval England to the founding of the United States in the 18th century and since then. The challengers said the history and tradition of gun law should make it easier for them to carry handguns.

Gun control advocates fear that the case could threaten action across the country, such as “red flag” laws targeting firearms from people judged to be dangerous, expanded criminal background checks on gun buyers, or restrictions on the gun Sale of “ghost” weapons that cannot be found.

Seven other states have similar requirements to New York.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul, Democrat, said after the arguments she hoped the judges will comply with her state’s “health law”, adding, “Having more armed people in public places doesn’t make us safer . “

The Supreme Court ruling is due to come in late June.

Reporting by Andrew Chung; Adaptation by Will Dunham

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-hear-major-gun-rights-case-new-york-2021-11-03/