In July, I filed suit against New York’s new social media, references, and training requirements for gun license applicants, created after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the state’s policy of allowing gun rights only to those whom the state believed had shown a “good reason” to exercise them. Four months later, the court today orally denied a motion to preliminarily enjoin those requirements. (A written opinion will be forthcoming.)
As to the social media and references requirement, the state argued that these requirements will not apply to those who submitted their applications before the law took effect, as I had done, thus negating my “standing” to sue. That is, the law doesn’t directly affect me (yet), so I can’t challenge it (yet). To be fair, assuming the government is going to process my pending application without giving effect to those requirements, the court got this one right. I am skeptical that they will process my application in this way, but the claims can be re-asserted if and when they “change their mind.”
As to the training requirement, the government needed to demonstrate a historical analog — in other words, a tradition of similar restrictions from the time the Second and Fourteenth Amendments were passed. The government argued that since everyone had to be in the state militia, and the militia had substantial training requirements, there is indeed an analog. The court was persuaded; however, on this issue, I believe the court made a mistake. Militia service and training requirements were not connected with gun ownership. One who was not male, or in the right age range, was not required to serve, but also not precluded from having a gun. Neither was one who simply disobeyed the service requirement. The Supreme Court has been clear that the rights conferred by the Second Amendment are not connected to militia membership, yet here we are with yet another ruling trying to connect them.
I intend to appeal the decision on the training requirement to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. As almost 8 months has passed since I filed a license application without any indication of processing, I also intend to add a claim of unconstitutional delay to the case. I know that, for many, this ruling is disappointing, but it is a step towards the ultimate resolution, and sets up a scenario where the Second Circuit either upholds a law based on re-connecting the right to militia membership — something that the Supreme Court plainly will not tolerate — or fixes this issue. And, regarding the social media and references requirement, if you or someone you know has applied for a carry license in New York after August 2022 and they would like representation, please be in touch and perhaps we can get these issues back on the board sooner rather than later.
How about you go to a pro gun state if you care about the 2nd so much stop trying to make our states less safe.
I’ve spent over 30 years of my life in New York, so you can fuck right off. The constitution applies in all 50 states and is not subject to modification because one state thinks that a right isn’t important.
Lived there for 30 years and are trying to take away the ability to check someone’s social media to see if they are planning an attack. Literally Social Media is the best tool to weed out suspect individuals from owning guns.
You seem to want any crazy or messed up individual to be able to walk into a gun store and buy a gun commit a mass murder and then only after they kill someone lose their rights to a gun. It’s sick
Not trying to take away their ability to check; trying to take away the requirement that you disclose *every social media account you have*. The government has no right to force applicants to disclose their OnlyFans, medical support groups, thoughts on political movements, etc.
As to your second paragraph, that is obviously not what I want, but sure, anyone who disagrees with you on gun control is *literally* advocating for mass murder. Please continue to fuck right off.
Jon, i live in the upstate (Troy) area and what you have done by filing this lawsuit is fantastic. While i hope your future results continue to improve what you have already done is more than the nra (not referring to nysrpa) has done since the safe act at least. Please keep up the good fight!
Was the denial of the Preliminary Injunction largely due to ‘standing’ issues (as most of us learned about in the first Antonyuk case)? Thanks for your efforts and I wish you luck with the 2nd Circuit. Sooner or later we will prevail!
Different standing issues from Antonyuk (there are many facets and applications of standing doctrines), but yes, basically.
Jon. I submitted my paperwork Sept. 09 and my references received their paperwork and sent it back. Are you saying that even though they accepted my paperwork that because it was after August I am not going to get a permit but rather it is going to be held up because of this social media stuff?
I’m not able to provide you with legal advice here, but I can say that as a practical matter, when it comes to gun license apps in NY submitted by anyone who is not a cop or has not bribed one, you should expect that if it can be held up, it will be held up. 🙂
Jon, continue fighting the forces of arrogance and stupidity that emanate from Albany. New York has restricted pistol permits for decades with no credible results on the benefits. I have had my permit for years and am yet to break a law concerning weapons. We need to stop pandering to the whining idiots in this country and demand that our rights are just as important as their right to whine.
“the rights conferred by the Second Amendment”
The rights enumerated in the organic Constitution were NOT “conferred” they were RECOGNIZED. And the rights not to be infringed are NOT to be infringed.
But try to get a law professional to read at this fourth-grader level and you’ll get nothing. That’s just not how things are done.
I’m not really sure the right to own guns is a natural right “conferred by God” or something, but regardless, the court is not interested in such arguments.