Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
Today, the Supreme Court gave New York’s “Concealed Carry Improvement Act” the boot, thanks to a challenge led by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF).
GOA and GOF weren’t messing around when they filed their petition back in February.
They argued that the Second Circuit ignored the Supreme Court’s precedent from the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case.
The petition took aim at parts of the law they deemed unconstitutional, like the “good moral character” requirement for concealed carry permits.
After the Bruen decision in 2022, Gov. Kathy Hochul and the Albany crew rushed to pass this new law, but it turned out to be even more restrictive than the last one that got shot down.
SEE ALSO: Clay’s Love for the MK 47 Mutant (w/Mag Tests)
GOA quickly stepped up to challenge it.
Even though GOA managed to get a preliminary injunction to block some parts of the law, the Second Circuit mostly reversed it.
The controversial law demanded that applicants for a concealed carry license prove their “good moral character,” undergo in-person interviews with law enforcement, provide four character references, and complete 18 hours of training—way more than the previous 4-hour requirement.
Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, didn’t hold back his excitement:
“New York’s anti-gun politicians were quick to double down after the Bruen decision, but today they’ve been smacked down again,” he said in a press release.
“With the High Court making clear the Second Circuit got it wrong and by remanding the case back to the lower court, the High Court is forcing New York’s politicians to eat a huge plate of humble pie,” he continued. “We look forward to continuing the fight for New Yorkers’ right to carry – without government pre-requisites.”
This Supreme Court decision marks a big win in the ongoing battle for gun rights in New York.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
Huh? The Supreme Court did not address the carry law on the merits. Instead it simply “vacated” and remanded for reconsideration in light of Rahimi. This is merely a suggestion that the Second got it wrong, but doesn’t prevent it from getting it wrong again. After all, it did such a wonderful job paying lip service to Bruen while ignoring it as far as they thought they could get away with. I don’t think that Rahimi will be too helpful with the “good moral character” requirement. If the Court had reversed and remanded, I think there would be more cause for celebration.
ℂ𝕆𝕀ℕ𝕊𝟚𝟝.ℂℴℳ<<<<<<<<<Open the account now
well it sounds like until the lower court rehears it nothing happened, so they can still refuse ccw’s and continue to put people on the nics no gun list for some more time. and of course they will implement a more convoluted new law to skirt the law once again.
Without any consequences they will do this indefinitely…..