The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legal Action spoke out this week about a controversial attempt to subvert not only the Second Amendment, but the Supreme Court as well.
The City of New York is attempting to get around a coming Supreme Court case that takes aim at the city’s oppressive stance on gun ownership.
N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Association, et al. v. City of N.Y., et al is the case on the Supreme Court dockets, and New York is getting increasingly desperate to shut down the case before it can be heard.
What is this Case About?
N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Association, et al. v. City of N.Y. was brought to the court because of New York City’s strict (and unconstitutional ) restrictions on gun ownership.
The NRA has long opposed the city’s oppressive rules and is in full support of the state-based Rifle & Pistol Association.
According to Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action:
“The City of New York clearly knows that its current restrictions on the carrying and transportation of lawfully owned firearms are unconstitutional and will fail under any standard of constitutional review, as the NRA has been saying for years.”
While the case is important for New York City residents and law abiding gun owners, it is also important to gun rights supporters in any location; the results of the case will send a clear message about the conservative-skewed court’s attitude towards Second Amendment rights.
Because of this, the NRA (and many progressive opposition groups) are watching to see how this important case progresses.
The Original Complaint
The Rifle & Pistol group is a Second Amendment rights group and includes many New York City residents, along with individuals from around the state.
The case asserts that while New York City residents have “premises licenses” which allow them to own and keep a handgun in their own homes, they do not have the wider options enjoyed by others in the state under the city’s restrictive rules.
If you live in New York City, you can try to get a “carry license” but according to the Atlantic, these are much harder to get and far more rare than the in-home style permit.
Owners with only a premises license are only able to keep the gun at home or take to a gun range within the city of New York.
These restrictions make it impossible for city gun owners to compete in any events that are not located in the city or visit any ranges that are out of town.
They are also barred from using a firearm for personal protection on the way to a second personal residence located outside of city limits.
This use of “premises” rules that do not permit travel except to specific locations within the city is a violation of residents’ Second Amendment rights, according to the case.
The level of restriction created by the New York City law prevents individuals from reasonably owning firearms.
The case made its way through some lesser courts, but eventually arrived at the Supreme Court. Newly appointed Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch may shift the balance of the Supreme Court towards further protections of Second Amendment rights.
Gorsuch in particular has been a strong supporter of gun rights, as has long time Justice Clarence Thomas. Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are considered to be near certain votes against the City of New York and support the rights of gun owners.
The City of New York has repeatedly requested delays, according to the SCOTUS blog, which maintains a record of all motions and actions involved in the case.
The case has been delayed for well over a year since the original filing and schedule, and New York finally ran out of extension options.
New York formally requested the case be dropped this week, hoping to have it removed entirely; their efforts are becoming increasingly desperate as they run out of options.
The case is important beyond the impact on New Yorkers, as a vote to support the Second Amendment here could showcase a new and positive direction for the highest court in the land when it comes to gun rights.