Opinion
- New York Ignores SCOTUS in Bruen: Gov. Hochul defies SCOTUS by replacing “proper cause” with a vague “good moral character” rule and expanding gun-free zones.
- Legal Battle in Antonyuk: Gun rights advocates challenge New York’s law, but the state delays with endless appeals.
- SCOTUS Must Act: The Supreme Court needs to ACT NOW and enforce Bruen to stop states from undermining the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court’s landmark decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen should have put an end to unconstitutional gun laws restricting lawful concealed carry.
But in classic anti-gun fashion, New York politicians, led by Governor Kathy Hochul, [who the Trump DOJ is now suing over immigration policy crimes] refused to respect the ruling. Instead, they replaced the unconstitutional “proper cause” requirement with an equally restrictive “good moral character” standard, adding a maze of new “sensitive places” where law-abiding citizens can’t carry.
The legal battle over these new restrictions has now reached the Supreme Court in Antonyuk v. James, and as Arbalest Quarrel’s newest article rightfully argues, SCOTUS needs to grant certiorari and settle this once and for all.
New York’s Defiance of Bruen
In Bruen, SCOTUS made it crystal clear: if a law restricting gun rights doesn’t fit within the “text, history, and tradition” of the Second Amendment, it’s unconstitutional!
However, New York lawmakers, a viper’s nest of “Tories” to this day, immediately scrambled to pass the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA), designed to sidestep Bruen while still achieving the same goal—denying citizens their right to bear arms.
As Arbalest Quarrel explains, “Governor Hochul did not comply with the High Court’s rulings and made plain she had no intention of complying.” Instead, the state developed a workaround by “mask[ing] use of that [Proper Cause] standard under the rubric of ‘Good Moral Character.’” This standard, coupled with the expansion of “sensitive places,” allowed New York to continue restricting gun rights under a different name.
The Arbalest Quarrel article details how Hochul and the New York Legislature pushed forward with the CCIA despite the clear precedent set by Bruen. The law forces applicants to prove they have “good moral character,” disclose social media accounts for government review, and comply with an ever-growing list of off-limits “sensitive locations.”
Antonyuk v. James: The Latest Second Amendment Showdown
Gun rights groups and citizens have been fighting these new laws in the courts, leading to the ongoing case Antonyuk v. James. The case challenges how New York’s new restrictions violate Bruen, particularly the expansion of “sensitive places” where carrying is prohibited. While federal courts have already struck down parts of the CCIA, New York keeps appealing, dragging the case back and forth. The state’s strategy? Delay, confuse, and wear down gun owners with endless legal battles.
As the Arbalest Quarrel article highlights, the case “has gone through several captioning iterations” as it moved through the courts, but “the original Antonyuk II case would always remain the lead case challenging Governor Hochul’s amendments.”
The Arbalest Quarrel article emphasizes that SCOTUS must act to resolve this issue decisively. Without intervention, New York and other anti-gun states will continue playing games with the Second Amendment, defying clear Supreme Court precedent.
The Supreme Court Needs to End This Now
The Bruen decision was supposed to be a win for the Second Amendment, but anti-gun states like New York are doing everything they can to water it down. If SCOTUS doesn’t step in soon, these states will keep exploiting legal loopholes to strip citizens of their rights. The Antonyuk case gives the Supreme Court a chance to reinforce its superior ruling and shut down New York’s anti-gun defiance once and for all.
The Arbalest Quarrel article urges SCOTUS to recognize the urgency of the matter and expedite review on the merits, warning that “the fate of the High Court’s decisions in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen and the fate of the Second Amendment itself, hang in the balance!” The Court has the power to stop this merry-go-round of unconstitutional laws—now they just need to use it.
The Bottom Line
The fight for gun rights didn’t end with Bruen. New York’s CCIA proves that anti-gun politicians will keep pushing the limits until SCOTUS slams the door shut. The Antonyuk case is that opportunity. The Supreme Court must step in, uphold Bruen, and make it clear that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right.
The New York Antonyuk Case: a Second Amendment Supreme Court Gun Case In The Making?
New York: A Cesspool Of Loyalists To The Crown Seeded the Anti-2nd Amendment Zealots of Today
from https://ift.tt/TfYrsQ2
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment