Supreme Court strikes down New York's handgun law

In a dissent joined by the other liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer noted the recent spate of gun violence, listing several shootings including the massacre at the Buffalo grocery store earlier this year. Thursday’s ruling “severely burdens States’ efforts” to curb gun violence, Breyer wrote. 

“The primary difference between the Court’s view and mine is that I believe the Amendment allows States to take account of the serious problems posed by gun violence that I have just described,” Breyer wrote. “I fear that the Court’s interpretation ignores these significant dangers and leaves States without the ability to address them.”

Justice Samuel Alito pushed back in his concurrence:

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote: “Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s unqualified command.” 

Conservative justices also dismissed concerns that defenders of New York’s gun law raised about how the law restricted the carrying of firearms into sensitive places. 

“It is true that people sometimes congregate in ‘sensitive places,’ and it is likewise true that law enforcement professionals are usually presumptively available in those locations. But expanding the category of “sensitive places” simply to all places of public congregation that are not isolated from law enforcement defines the category of ‘sensitive places’ far too broadly,” Thomas wrote. 

Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez calls the Supreme Court ruling on guns a “nightmare for public safety,” adding that “New York’s strong gun laws have saved lives for more than a century, and the Supreme Court’s decision to open the door for millions of New Yorkers to carry a concealed weapon is a nightmare for public safety.”

The Supreme Court struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed gun outside the home.

In April, 10 people were shot by a gunman on the New York City subway in Brooklyn.

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed gun outside the home.    

Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh, who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, each filed concurring opinions stressing the limits of Thursday’s ruling 

“Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess,” Alito wrote. 

Still, the majority opinion changed the framework that lower courts will use going forward as they analyze other gun restrictions, including potentially the proposals currently before Congress if they eventually become law. 

The US Supreme Court's ruling on Thursday to strike down a New York gun law that places restrictions on carrying a concealed gun outside the home "expands the Second Amendment right," CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said.

"What we don't know is if it completely eliminates the possibility for any sort of gun regulation," he said. "It is possible that red flag laws may still be intact after this."

The ruling indicates that the court is moving into the direction where the conservative justice wants "the Second Amendment to be a first-class right like the First Amendment."

"What the conservatives on the Supreme Court are saying is, 'we want the Second Amendment to be a first-class right like the First Amendment. And we want to be able to carry guns anywhere anytime without any sort of regulation by the government — without background checks, without restrictions on where you can take a weapon, without restrictions on how you can carry a weapon.' Now, they haven't gone that far yet. But they are clearly moving in that direction," Toobin said.

This comes against the backdrop of a slew of mass shootings across the United States.

The Supreme Court moments ago struck down a New York gun law that places restrictions on carrying a concealed gun outside the home.  

This is the widest expansion of gun rights in a decade: In 2008, the Supreme Court held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms at home for self-defense.

After the ruling, however, to the frustration of gun rights advocates, lower courts relied upon language in the opinion to uphold many gun regulations.

Except for a followup decision two years later, the justices largely stayed away from the issue, infuriating gun rights advocates and even some of the justices themselves.

Justice Clarence Thomas declared at one point that the "Second Amendment is a disfavored right in this court."

Which brings us to this case: After Justice Amy Coney Barrett took her seat, the court agreed to take up a new case, highlighting the impact of former President Donald Trump's three nominees on the court.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen concerned a New York law governing licenses to carry concealed handguns in public for self-defense. It requires a resident to obtain a license to carry a concealed pistol or revolver and demonstrate that "proper cause" exists for the permit. Residents must show that they have a great need for the license and that they face a "special or unique danger to their life."

Here's what the justices said during arguments: At oral arguments, the conservative majority court seemed poised to strike down the New York law as going too far — although it is always dangerous to gauge the outcome of a case by what the justices say in open court. There did seem to be broad support for regulations that govern sensitive places, but the looming question will be the breadth of the decision and how it might impact other laws.

Arguments were held on Nov. 3, 2021, months before a mass shooting on a Brooklyn subway carried out by a gunman who put on a gas mask, deployed a gas canister, and then began shooting, firing at least 33 times. In May, a gunman, killed 10 people in a Buffalo, New York, supermarket; less than two weeks later, another killed 21 adults at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.

During oral arguments, several of the justices asked questions surrounding regulations aimed at sensitive places, including the subways. Paul Clement, a lawyer for the National Rifle Association affiliate behind the challenge, argued that New York is "entitled to have laws that say that you can't have weapons in sensitive places" and that he was not challenging those laws.

For her part, liberal Justice Elena Kagan pushed Clement for his views on the definition of sensitive places. She was the first to bring up New York City subways, asking if they count as sensitive places.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito, perhaps trying to gauge the scope of the eventual opinion, looked at the issue from the perspective of law-abiding people riding subways who want to be able to carry a gun to protect themselves.

Alito asked New York Solicitor General Barbara Underwood about people returning from work late at night in Manhattan. A doorman, a nurse, somebody who washes dishes are all citizens who have to "commute home by subway." Alito suggested that they may be people who are scared but who would not qualify for a license under the New York law.

Read more about the case and the opinion's implications here.

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed gun outside the home.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion in the 6-3 decision, according to CNN's Jessica Schneider.

“Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution,” Thomas wrote.

Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh, who was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, each filed concurring opinions stressing the limits of Thursday’s ruling:

Still, the majority opinion changed the framework that lower courts will use going forward as they analyze other gun restrictions, including potentially the proposals currently before Congress if they eventually become law.

"This challenge was brought by two men in upstate New York who were denied the ability to get this license because they were unable to show this proper cause. And what the proper cause required is that they had to have a special need for carrying the concealed weapons and they had to face a special or unique danger to their life. So the court here in this opinion saying that that law just goes too far, it violates the 14th Amendment, that particular proper cause clause," Schneider said. 

The decision comes as the US has seen several mass shootings in the past few months, including one on the New York City subway and in a Buffalo grocery store.

"The conservative majority is really going back to the idea that Second Amendment has really become a second-class right. This is something that we've heard Justice Thomas say in opinions, we've heard him say it this public, Justice Alito as well," Schneider reported.