Washington, D.C., June 3, 2022 - Following the high-profile mass shootings of the last month, Brady urges attention to the pending decision in NYSPRA v. Bruen, which asks the Supreme Court to invalidate New York’s 111-year-old law requiring permits for concealed carry. The arguments put forth by the gun lobby in this case, if accepted by the Court, could vastly increase the number of firearms in public spaces, leading to more gun violence at a time when the American people are desperately demanding action to stop this crisis.A decision in this case is expected during the month of June. Read Brady’s Amicus Brief in this case here, while Brady attorneys Jonathan Lowy and Kelly Sampson have authored a law review article that explains what’s at stake in Bruen.Brady Chief Counsel Jonathan Lowy explained:
“The stakes in this case could not be higher; an expansive ruling in this case could endanger permitting laws in seven other states and potentially many other gun violence prevention laws on the books across the country. At the arguments in the fall, some Justices signaled at least an openness to the gun lobby’s argument that the Constitution entitles individuals to carry a gun for virtually any purpose anywhere. That viewpoint contradicts centuries of history and tradition, which has always allowed for strong gun regulation, including prohibiting public gun carrying. That radical reading of the Constitution can also be deadly, as it could deprive Americans of the policy tools they need to end the gun violence crisis that has gripped our nation. The high-profile mass shootings of the past month have shown the future that could result if the gun lobby’s extreme, ahistorical views are accepted. The Second Amendment does not prevent states from enacting common-sense gun violence prevention laws such as New York’s, and we hope that the Court rules accordingly.”
About NYSRPA v. Bruen:Petitioners in this case, two individuals and the New York affiliate of the NRA — the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) – are mounting another challenge to New York’s law, which requires individuals to show “proper cause” to obtain a permit to carry a concealed handgun in public spaces. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this law in response to an identical challenge in 2012 and the majority of other federal Courts of Appeals have found similar “good cause” restrictions consistent with the Second Amendment following the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller.Although Petitioners mischaracterize the law as a complete ban on ordinary citizens carrying handguns for self-defense, the two individuals were granted licenses to carry handguns for hunting, target shooting, and in unpopulated areas for self-defense. One of the Petitioner’s licenses also allowed him to carry a handgun for self-defense while commuting to and from work. The question presented to the Supreme Court is whether the denial of Petitioners' applications for wholly unrestricted concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated their Second Amendment rights.Petitioners in this case are seeking a right not just to carry guns in public, but a right to carry guns for use in armed confrontation where any individual, trained or untrained in the lawful use of force, can deploy deadly violence and become an arbiter of life and death.
Brady has one powerful mission — to unite all Americans against gun violence. We work across Congress, the courts, and our communities with over 90 grassroots chapters, bringing together young and old, red and blue, and every shade of color to find common ground in common sense. In the spirit of our namesakes Jim and Sarah Brady, we have fought for over 45 years to take action, not sides, and we will not stop until this epidemic ends. It’s in our hands.
By continuing to browse, you consent to the use of cookies on this site.
By clicking OK below, you will be directed to a website operated by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, an independent 501(c)(4) entity.