WASHINGTON, DC – On June 23rd, the Supreme Court handed down a ruling that has struck down New York’s overreaching gun control law regarding concealed carry, as New York required concealed carry applicants to show “proper cause” for why they wish to carry a concealed weapon.
The case relates to two men, Brandon Koch and Robert Nash, who filed suit over the New York law when they were denied the right to obtain a concealed carry permit because they didn’t satisfy New York’s ambiguous need for applicants to “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.”
Both Koch and Nash were described as “adult, law-abiding New York residents,” per the high court’s decision, yet New York “denied both of their applications for unrestricted licenses, allegedly because Koch and Nash failed to satisfy the ‘proper cause’ requirement.”
This clearly didn’t rest well with the Supreme Court, with Justice Clarence Thomas observing that while many states require licensure for concealed carry, those application processes are “based on objective criteria,” whereas New York’s application process requires a “special need,” which the Supreme Court found to be unconstitutional.
“In 43 States, the government issues licenses to carry based on objective criteria. But in six States, including New York, the government further conditions issuance of a license to carry on a citizen’s showing of some additional special need. 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 further explained in the decision that such a “special need” required by New York “is demanding…For example, living or working in an area ‘noted for criminal activity’ does not suffice.”
Outside of referencing past decisions like 2010’s McDonald v. City of Chicago and 2008’s D.C. v. Heller as a means to justify the ruling, Justice Thomas also went back to the plain language of the Second Amendment where it reads the right “to keep and bear arms” – highlighting that “bear arms” has been defined in prior decisions as literally carrying on one’s person.
In a not-so-shocking turn of events, left-leaning media outlets and pundits are already up in arms over the Supreme Court’s decision striking down New York’s unconstitutional law.
Leftist pundit Keith Olbermann has already called to “dissolve the Supreme Court” over the decision, saying New York should “ignore this ruling.”
Neal Katyal, author of the 2019 book titled “Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump,” compared abortions to the Constitutional rights to keep and bear arms, referencing the leaked SCOTUS draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade as being hypocritical when paired with the decision regarding the striking down of New York’s gun control law.
But then there’s New York Governor Kathy Hochul, who obviously bears a more vested interest in the court’s ruling since it impacts her state – and needless to say, she’s triggered.
Invoking the recent mas shootings that occurred in Uvalde and Buffalo, Governor Hochul alleged that the ending of the unconstitutional law within her state would somehow render a wave of violence.
“This could place millions of New Yorkers in harm’s way. And this is at a time when we’re still mourning the loss of lives as I just mentioned. This decision isn’t just reckless, it’s reprehensible. It’s not what New Yorkers want. And we should have the right of determination of what we want to do in terms of our gun laws in our state.”
Governor Hochul went to far as to call people fighting to have their Second Amendment rights upheld as being part of the “insanity of gun culture” that she asserted “has possessed everyone up to the Supreme Court.”