NEW YORK — A recent decision by the Supreme Court does not prevent New York from enforcing its laws that prohibit firearms in certain “sensitive” areas, as confirmed by a federal appeals court on Thursday. This ruling reiterates findings that were previously established a year ago.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, located in Manhattan, indicated that it had heeded a request from the Supreme Court to reassess its December 2023 decision, particularly in light of a ruling made by the Supreme Court in June regarding a different firearm case. Additionally, the court mentioned that the high court had directed seven other state and federal courts to revisit their respective decisions.
In its assessment, the appeals court clarified that the Supreme Court case pertained to regulations of firearms that were “quite different” from those in New York. A ruling made in December by a three-judge panel from the 2nd Circuit had previously affirmed that New York could maintain prohibitions on firearms within 20 designated “sensitive” locations, as well as insist on handgun owners demonstrating “good moral character.” Among its decisions, the court disallowed the requirement for handgun license applicants to disclose their social media accounts and rejected a ban on concealed firearms in various public spaces, including shops, supermarkets, and restaurants.
In 2022, in response to a Supreme Court ruling that invalidated New York’s earlier regulations—restricting the ability to carry firearms outside the home to individuals who could showcase a specific need for protection—the state passed new legislation. This law expanded access to handgun licenses for more individuals but simultaneously imposed restrictions on carry locations. The legislation emerged following a tragic mass shooting perpetrated by a white supremacist in Buffalo that resulted in the deaths of ten Black individuals and includes bans in areas such as zoos, playgrounds, schools, theaters, bars, voting sites, buses, and airports.
The 2nd Circuit noted in a footnote that its ruling occurs “at a very early stage of this litigation,” stating that the legal challenges presented must now undergo further evaluation through legal arguments, historical inquiries, and any additional evidence as the case continues.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul expressed that the appeals court’s decision reaffirmed the “common-sense measure” she enacted two years prior. She asserted that this law is contributing to saving lives across New York and is instrumental in the state achieving one of the lowest firearm mortality rates in the country.
Gun Owners of America, a lobbying organization involved in the ongoing litigation, termed Thursday’s ruling as “incredibly frustrating.” Erich Pratt, the organization’s senior vice president, stated that the 2nd Circuit made a mistake previously and that the Supreme Court’s directive to revisit their ruling has resulted in a decision that he believes disregards the Justices and the rights of gun owners in New York.
Sam Paredes, representing the organization’s board, indicated they may seek intervention from the Supreme Court once more. He expressed concern that the ruling leaves many New Yorkers, who wish to protect themselves and their families, vulnerable.
In response, New York Attorney General Letitia James described the ruling as yet another win in the ongoing fight against gun violence, asserting that efforts to weaken the state’s safety regulations have repeatedly failed.
David Pucino, the legal director at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence—a group that contributed legal documents to the case—claimed that this ruling affirms the previous correctness of the 2nd Circuit. He stated that gun safety laws remain constitutional, as they are in alignment with historical and traditional norms.
