CRPA- and NRA-Supported case will soon be heard by the Supreme Court and could change the entire scope of Second Amendment rights and what anti-gun laws will be tolerated.
For nearly a decade, the Supreme Court has largely avoided Second Amendment questions. Despite receiving dozens of petitions on various Second Amendment issues during that period, the Court only ruled (favorably) on one case without hearing it. Justices Thomas, Scalia, and Gorsuch each joined at least one of three dissents to petitions the Court rejected, all three of which were in NRA-supported cases, with CRPA being a plaintiff in two of them and an amicus in the other (Jackson v. City of San Francisco; Peruta v. California; and Kolbe v. Hogan).
Today – with a more-friendly Supreme Court– the Court ended that era and accepted a Second Amendment case for review. The NRA-supported case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York challenges New York City’s restrictive handgun licensing scheme that prohibits its residents from traveling with a firearm outside city limits as a violation of the Second Amendment and Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The Supreme Court will now decide whether these infringements on the right to keep and bear arms are constitutional.
CRPA funded an amicus curiae brief urging the high court to hear this case and overturn the lower courts’ decisions to uphold the law.
The Court’s ultimate decision could have a lasting impact on future Second Amendment challenges to ill-conceived gun control laws. In other words, this case, that CRPA played a role in – if it succeeds – could have dramatic effects across the nation, particularly in California.
CRPA President and chief legal counsel Chuck Michel noted:
“For one, a decision is likely to clarify the appropriate legal standard of review for Second Amendment challenges. Given the Ninth Circuit’s disparaging treating of pro-2A cases in the past, clarification of that standard could effectively “reset” existing and prior legal challenges to many of California’s anti-gun laws. The Supreme Court’s decision is also likely to have a significant impact on the current lawsuits challenging California’s restrictive “may-issue” CCW policies, arbitrary restrictions on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, bans on so-called “assault weapons,” and more.
If the Court adopts a stricter standard of review for evaluating the constitutionality of gun control laws, many of California’s gun control laws would be subject to legal challenge. The state would then have to prove that the laws are effective and sound policy meant to accomplish a compelling government interest. Since most of California’s gun laws were not actually based on legitimate evidence or sound policy, the state often times will not be able to meet this higher standard.
Plaintiffs in the case are represented by renowned constitutional advocate attorney Paul Clement.
Deadlines for submitting briefs and a date for oral arguments have not yet been scheduled, but it is likely the case will be heard later this year or early next year. CRPA will again be participating in amicus briefs to the Supreme Court in this matter. Click here and donate to support the case and the amicus brief campaign.
To stay up-to-date on this and other important Second Amendment lawsuits, make sure you are subscribed to NRA and CRPA email alerts. And be sure to visit the NRA-ILA California dedicated webpage at www.StandAndFightCalifornia.com and the CRPA webpage at www.CRPA.org.