{"id":86556,"date":"2022-10-10T13:35:57","date_gmt":"2022-10-10T18:35:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=86556"},"modified":"2022-10-10T13:35:57","modified_gmt":"2022-10-10T18:35:57","slug":"86556","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=86556","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

NY AG appeals judge’s decision halting enforcement of most new carry restrictions<\/a><\/p>\n

New York Attorney General Letitia James is asking the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a federal judge\u2019s decision to halt enforcement of many aspects of the state\u2019s new Concealed Carry Improvement Act, arguing that there\u2019s a \u201cserious risk of irreparable harm to public safety and the\u00a0<\/span>possibility of regulatory chaos\u201d if U.S. District Judge Glenn Suddaby\u2019s decision to grant a temporary restraining order is allowed to take effect.<\/span><\/p>\n

Suddaby\u2019s ruling left intact, at least for now, the draconian training requirements imposed by the state in the wake of the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in\u00a0New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen<\/em>, but barred enforcement of most of the state\u2019s new \u201csensitive places\u201d where guns are banned, as well as many of the other requirements mandated for those applying for a concealed carry permit; turning over social media accounts and informing authorities of all other family members living with the applicant among them.<\/p>\n

In her request to the Second Circuit, James\u00a0claims<\/a>\u00a0that if the appeals court allows the TRO to take effect, the result will be massive confusion over the status of the law, which might be true but pales in significance compared to the daily deprivation of the right to keep and bear arms that the CCIA has enabled.<\/p>\n

Exposing eighteen million New Yorkers to a heightened risk of\u00a0gunfire severely outweighs any prejudice to plaintiffs here from a stay.Five plaintiffs allegedly wish to carry guns into specific sensitive or\u00a0restricted places, such as the Rosamond Gifford Zoo, the airport for a\u00a0flight to Tennessee, the church where one plaintiff lives, or Catskills\u00a0State Park, through which another plaintiff must drive.<\/p>\n

Yet the district court restrained defendants from enforcing the\u00a0challenged CCIA provisions on a statewide basis, as applied to anyone\u00a0\u2014\u00a0a remedy far beyond what relates to the individual harms alleged.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Well, no. Virtually everyone who possesses a concealed carry permit and all those who wish to do so are being harmed by the state\u2019s new restrictions. As for the potential for \u201cregulatory chaos\u201d if the new laws are halted, I have news for James and other anti-gun Democrats: the CCIA is already sowing confusion. In fact, in St. Lawrence County no concealed carry applications have been issued<\/a>\u00a0since the law took effect back on September 1st because no one is clear on what the law entails.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe just haven\u2019t been accepting applications since the new law has taken effect. Number one, the state has already changed the application that they originally came out with once. You know, to keep processing stuff that\u2019s not even right to begin with. So at this point basically what it is is that we\u2019re waiting for clarification from both the state and the judge,\u201d said Santamoor.<\/p>\n

As New York\u2019s gun laws work their way through the courts, gun shop owner Matt Pinkerton is frustrated, believing the new laws were flawed from the start.<\/p>\n

\u201cI completely understand why the permit process would be slowed or halted at this point because the governor has put into place a system that is very logistically difficult to enact,\u201d he said.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

For New York lawmakers, the confusion isn\u2019t a bug, but a feature of the new law meant to artificially depress the number of citizens exercising their right to carry a firearm in self-defense.<\/p>\n

James offered no real historical analogues to the sweeping number of locations deemed \u201csensitive\u201d and off-limits to concealed carry. Instead, she argues to the Second Circuit that it\u2019s the plaintiffs themselves who had the burden of showing that the Second Amendment\u2019s text and tradition \u201cplausibly encom-passed any of these areas.\u201d In a bit of circular logic, James claims that once a state has declared a location to be a \u201csensitive place\u201d, it should automatically be presumed to be justified.<\/p>\n

Carrying weapons in sensitive places has traditionally been \u201caltogether prohibited.\u201d\u00a0These areas thus fall\u00a0<\/span>outside the \u201cscope of the Second Amendment,\u201d and are \u201can exception to the general right to bear arms\u201d codified therein.\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The question, of course, is whether New York is violating the Second Amendment rights of its residents by declaring broad swathes of the state to be \u201cgun-free zones.\u201d Under James\u2019s argument, once the state has deemed a particular location to be \u201csensitive\u201d, it automatically falls outside of the Second Amendment\u2019s protections; a nice trick, but one that flies in the face of what the Supreme Court actually said in\u00a0Bruen.<\/em><\/p>\n

James also takes issue with how Suddaby determined that many of the state\u2019s \u201csensitive places\u201d don\u2019t have similar analogues in U.S. history.<\/p>\n

Second, the court\u2019s analogies were flawed\u2014none more so than for\u00a0<\/span>barring weapons on mass transit, which the court held to be inconsistent\u00a0<\/span>with nineteenth-century laws authorizing carrying pistols when \u201c\u2018on a<\/span>\u00a0journey.\u2019\u201d\u00a0<\/span>Old and new regulations may be\u00a0<\/span><\/span>\u201crelevantly similar\u201d in many ways.<\/span><\/p>\n

Comparing hurtling through tunnels in electrically powered cars filled with thousands of people (including schoolchildren and the elderly) to\u00a0journeying via horse through the\u00a0countryside is like saying\u00a0that \u201ca green\u00a0<\/span><\/span>truck and a green hat are relevantly similar\u201d because both are green.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019s worth noting that \u201churtling through tunnels in electrically powered cars\u201d with a permitted concealed firearm was perfectly legal on New York City subways until just a few weeks ago. The ban on concealed carry on public transportation in the city and state wasn\u2019t enacted until after the\u00a0Bruen\u00a0decision was handed down; before that those chosen few who were lucky or well-connected enough to receive a permit were perfectly fine carrying on the subway. Only after the average New Yorker was told she could do the same did the state reverse course and declare mass transit to be \u201csensitive places\u201d where guns must be banned; again without any evidence that there were similar bans in place at the time of the ratification of either the Second or Fourteenth amendments.<\/p>\n

All in all I found James\u2019 initial filing to be less than impressive, but given the Second Circuit\u2019s past hostility towards the right to keep and bear arms she might not need a strong argument to be successful at blocking Suddaby\u2019s ruling from taking effect\u2026 at least immediately. No matter what the Second Circuit decides, expect this to be appealed up to the Supreme Court, and hopefully it won\u2019t take long for the justices who struck down New York\u2019s \u201cmay issue\u201d laws to halt enforcement of the state\u2019s latest infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

NY AG appeals judge’s decision halting enforcement of most new carry restrictions New York Attorney General Letitia James is asking the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a federal judge\u2019s decision to halt enforcement of many aspects of the state\u2019s new Concealed Carry Improvement Act, arguing that there\u2019s a \u201cserious risk of irreparable harm … Continue reading “”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,50,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-86556","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-courts","category-goobermint","category-rkba"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86556","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=86556"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86556\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":86557,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86556\/revisions\/86557"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=86556"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=86556"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=86556"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}