15 Second Briefing:
The Supreme Court recently delivered a victory for the Second Amendment in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
In a 6-3 vote, the court struck down a New York state law that demanded citizens show special self-defense needs in order to carry a concealed firearm. The court ruled that this stipulation was unconstitutional under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) delivered a victory for the Second Amendment in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In a 6-3 vote, the court struck down a New York state law that demanded citizens show special self-defense needs in order to be awarded a permit to carry a concealed firearm.
The court held the precedents set in the supreme court cases District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010) which supported the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the court’s opinion which recognized that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of U.S. citizens to possess a handgun for self-defense both in the home and outside of it.
Along with New York, five other states have similar laws requiring citizens to show “proper cause” to receive a license to carry a concealed firearm. California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey all have rules in place that restrict access to concealed carry permits for certain citizens based on the discretion of law enforcement officials.
Requiring citizens to show special self-defense needs communicates that the safety and self-defense rights of some citizens are more important than others. This law gave state law enforcement officials the power to judge who gets the right to defend themselves and who does not.
On June 23, the court ruled that this additional requirement violates the U.S. Constitution.
This Second Amendment victory will potentially force states with similar unconstitutional requirements to change their concealed carry laws or the courts will likely strike them down as they did in New York.
Maryland State Senator, Michale J. Hough said on Thursday, “Maryland’s going to have to redo its ‘carry’ law, and if they think they won’t, the courts are going to come in and force them to.”
As someone who was awarded a concealed carry permit by the state of Maryland because of his “assumed risk” position as a legislator, he recognized the unfairness of these “proper cause” requirements.
“There’s actually sort of an elitist nature to that,” Hough said.
These types of laws have served as another way for anti-gun legislators to unequally withhold the right to bear arms from some citizens while allowing it for others in positions such as their own. These policies disenfranchise U.S. citizens from their constitutionally protected right to defend themselves and their loved ones using a firearm.
This court decision is a major victory in the fight to keep and defend the Second Amendment. As the urgency to address violent crime in the United States increases, the gun control lobby continues to use strategic opportunism to push forward its agenda.
This Supreme Court ruling needs to serve as a wake-up call that it’s time to invest in real, common-sense solutions to address violent crime rather than continuously attempt to infringe upon the Second Amendment.
Big Daddy Unlimited advocates strongly for Second Amendment rights because we believe that the right to keep and bear arms exists to protect all of the other God-given rights of American citizens. Become a member today to join our community of freedom-loving Americans, and let’s work together to support and defend our Second Amendment rights.