A century-old New York state gun safety law was struck down in a 6-3 ruling June 23 in the landmark Supreme Court case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. v. Bruen. 

The law required New York citizens with the desire to carry concealed weapons to show “proper cause” beyond the protection of property or themselves. Per state requirements, an applicant to carry concealed weapons could satisfy the “proper cause” requirement by demonstrating “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.” 

The court’s conservative supermajority claimed the second amendment should not be restricted to individuals who demonstrate a “special need” to carry a weapon in public, thus claiming the law was in violation of second amendment rights. The court’s decision makes it easier to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm in public places.

“Why should citizens need to prove that they are entitled to — or have a special need to — exercise their constitutional right to carry guns outside the home for self-defense?” Justice John Roberts asked during oral arguments made Nov. 2021.

John Compton, a political science professor at Chapman University, said it was not surprising that the Supreme Court is “now advancing a right-leaning interpretation of the Second Amendment.”

“Following a series of conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, the Court began prioritizing the rights of individual gun owners over the traditionally accepted public safety rationales for gun regulation,” Compton said. “President Trump's three appointments to the Court accelerated this rightward shift, creating a majority that appears determined to strike down gun regulations.”

In response to the Court’s overturn, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-NY) and the New York State Senate passed legislation that enhances licensing requirements and adds new provisions for sensitive areas since the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision still allows states to issue their own licensing requirements. The legislative package establishes New York as a point of contact (POC) state.

POC states are ones that serve as an “intermediary” between a Federal Firearms License (FFL) and the federal database checked by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This cross-referencing system allows states and the NICS to determine whether an individual is permitted to possess a firearm, according to state and federal law. 

Some feel that the New York legislative package — which the local courts began rolling out Sept. 1 — circumvents the Supreme Court’s decision, as there are still a number of restrictions in place for concealed carry permits and firearms in general.

One of the measures included in the legislation bans concealed carry permit holders from bringing weapons into “sensitive sites,” including public playgrounds, parks, libraries, subway stations, bars, restaurants that serve alcohol, airports and houses of worship.

As of Sept. 4, the legal purchasing age for a semi-automatic rifle was raised to 21 years in NY. 

“The Court's current conservative majority has undoubtedly placed serious roadblocks in the way of legislative efforts to reduce gun violence in this country. However, it's important to emphasize that there are still many measures lawmakers could take that would likely survive judicial scrutiny,” Compton said. “It's too early to say whether the revised law will survive judicial scrutiny, but it's certainly possible that it will.”

Abbey Umali, a graduate student studying school psychology at Chapman, feels differently about approaches to reducing gun violence in the United States and how the situation in New York fits into the bigger picture.

“Because of the new ‘gun free zones’ New York has implemented, I worry even more shootings will take place,” said Umali, who serves as the president of Chapman Republicans. “Restrictive gun laws do not stop criminals from illegally accessing weapons, but they do stop law-abiding citizens from being able to protect themselves and others. Many proponents of restrictive gun laws seem to ignore the fact that criminals are not deterred by laws or consequences if they have a premeditated plan to hurt someone.”

Umali emphasized that the majority of individuals purchase guns as a preventative safety measure to protect themselves and their families.

Many regulations placed by states related to firearms may survive scrutiny from the Supreme Court. Compton emphasized the use of background checks and other types of screenings, saying they will likely be upheld.