Second Circuit Upholds Injunction on Portions of New York Carry Law

Bearing Arms ^ | 12/8/23 | Cam Edwards

[CFW]

Gun owners didn’t get complete vindication from a three-judge panel on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, but the panel did uphold injunctions on several important parts of New York’s “Concealed Carry Improvement Act” in a decision released Friday morning.

The state’s default ban on carrying on private property cannot be enforced, according to the court, along with its social media disclosure requirement for concealed carry applicants. The court also ruled that New York’s ban on lawful concealed carry in places of worship cannot be enforced against Pastor Michael Spencer and the members of the Tabernacle Family Church, though other houses of worship remain subject to the prohibition.

That’s the good news. The bad news is that the Second Circuit panel ruled that most portions of the CCIA can be enforced, including the “good moral character” requirement for applicants. Though the panel recognized that subjective determinations of an individual’s moral character could be used to deny eligible applicants a carry license, the judges in essence concluded that unless or until it can be proven that licensing authorities are doing so, the statute is presumptively constitutional. That gives far more deference to the New York law than the Supreme Court showed in Bruen, but the Second Circuit seems intent on vesting authorities with the discretionary power to decide who gets to exercise their right to bear arms.

[CFW]

A win for the Constitution in part. But parts of the ruling still need to be appealed.

[Reno89519]

A step in the right direction.

[CFW]

And from the article:

"Though the state is the recipient of this deferential treatment throughout the court’s opinion, there are definitely some wins in today’s decision, most notably the panel’s conclusion that New York’s default ban on carrying on private property isn’t likely to pass constitutional muster. And as the Firearms Policy Coalition pointed out, today’s decision is based on a request for injunctive relief, and the constitutionality of the challenged portions of the Concealed Carry Improvement Act have yet to be ultimately decided."

[nonliberal]

Concealed means concealed.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Citizens in Colonial America were REQUIRED BY LAW to bring their “firelocks” to church. After services they drilled and often had target practice on church grounds.

From the 1982 Senate Report on the RKBA, now out of print and highly suppressed. I have a paper copy from the US Government Printing house. Here is an on line copy.

https://guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt.html

“In the colonies, availability of hunting and need for defense led to armament statues comparable to those of the early Saxon times. In 1623, Virginia forbade its colonists to travel unless they were “well armed”; in 1631 it required colonists to engage in target practice on Sunday and to “bring their peeces to church.”[26] In 1658 it required every householder to have a functioning firearm within his house and in 1673 its laws provided that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to purchase a firearm would have one purchased for him by the government, which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do so.[27] In Massachusetts, the first session of the legislature ordered that not only freemen, but also indentured servants own firearms and in 1644 it imposed a stern 6 shilling fine upon any citizen who was not armed.[28](p.4)”