The Supreme Court Hands Down Major Gun Rights Victory

As predicted, the Supreme Court handed down a momentous opinion in favor of Second Amendment rights today in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. In what will likely prove one of the most important decisions in his illustrious career as a conservative jurist, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a 6-3 majority opinion that brought greater clarity to this and future challenges under the Second Amendment.

In 2008, the Supreme Court recognized the right to bear arms as an individual right in District of Columbia v. Heller. Two years after Heller, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court ruled that this right applied against the states.

This case concerned concealed-carry restrictions under N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f) that require a showing of “proper cause.” Lower courts upheld the New York law, but there were ample constitutional concerns over its vague standard, such as showing that you are “of good moral character.” New York wanted to exercise discretion in deciding who needs to carry guns in public while gun owners believe that the law flips the constitutional presumption in favor of such a right.

Thomas rejected the two-part analysis used by lower courts and held that the presumption must be in favor of the individual right to possess a handgun in public like other rights in the Bill of Rights. The Court held “consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.” Accordingly, “because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution.”

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul immediately declared “Shocking, absolutely shocking that they have taken away our right to have reasonable restrictions.” The Claude Rain moment aside, it was shocking that Hochul would be shocked. Many of us were predicting a major loss for over a year and New York, as usual, litigated a bad case and made more bad law for gun control advocates.

Gov. Hochul added “This is New York. We don’t back down.” That may be welcomed news for gun rights advocates given the record in cases like this one in reinforcing Second Amendment rights. As previously discussed, New York has proven a fount of cases strengthening gun rights.

Here is the opinion:

174 thoughts on “The Supreme Court Hands Down Major Gun Rights Victory”

  1. @Sam,

    That’s it in a nutshell.

    9 states still have ‘may issue’ language in their state laws.
    The rest have ‘shall issue’. One word difference and the Liberals claim the sky is falling. (Even though 41 states are still around… with 25 offering Constitutional Carry)

    The sad thing is that Alito had to write a rebuttal to Breyer’s dissenting opinion.

    The facts of the case should have made this a 9-0 decision… yet three of the justices were blinded by their own political views.

    You hit the nail on the head.
    In this country there’s the belief in presumed innocent which means the burden is on the state to make their case.
    That’s the same here.
    You have a 2nd Amendment Right to bare arms, and its the burden of the state to show just cause why you shouldn’t.

    Note: Over the years, other states switched from ‘may issue’ to ‘shall issue’ because of the abuse by the states.

    Ron Perlman claimed that SCOTUS decision was racist. The irony… the old law was racist the decision fixes this.


  2. “. . . require a showing of ‘proper cause.’”

    So I have to “prove” to a government official that I am worthy of exercising a right, before I am allowed to use that right? A right is not a permission. Slaves exist by permission. Free individuals exist by right.

    This country has gotten exactly backwards the proper relationship between an individual and the government. Today it’s: The government can do whatever it pleases. The individual can do only that which pleases the government.

    This perversion is not what the Founders built.

  3. Shocking…Liberals learned that the Constitution applies even to them. No wonder they are upset.

  4. Hey Democrats, don’t ever own a gun; remain unarmed, please. No more guns for you. No more armed security guards for you. No more private security protection for you.
    F off, quite frankly.

    Republicans, Trump supporters, conservatives….Get your guns if you haven’t already. Arm yourselves and be prepared to defend yourselves. They are coming for you.

  5. The January 6th Committee Hearings actually cited Eric Holder as some kind of paragon of integrity and political independence!

    If we ever needed evidence of what a fraud these hearings are, there you have it.

  6. We are watching Democrats and their Stasi-like, Gestapo, Secret Police, formerly known as the DOJ and FBI, treat one side VERY differently under THEIR unjust one-sided injustice system.

    When will federal agents show up to say, someone like Andrew Gillum’s house before 7am and force him to go outside with no pants on while an “electronic sniffing dog,” and federal agents rummage through his house and and seize all of his electronic devices. Did that happen to Gillum? Or ANY OTHER DEMOCRAT? Anyone know?

    The level of rage and anger in this country as we witness what the Democrats are doing is reaching boiling point. This cannot continue. And it will not continue. Too many people are VERY aware of what is going on.

    1. The Gestapo.

      “Federal investigators on Wednesday conducted a search of the home of former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, people briefed on the matter tell CNN.

      Clark is the former DOJ lawyer who former President Donald Trump sought to install as attorney general in the days before the January 6 Capitol riot as top officials refused to go along with his vote fraud claims.

      It wasn’t clear what investigators were seeking at Clark’s home, but the raid was part of the Justice Department’s sweeping investigation into the effort to overturn the 2020 elections, according to sources familiar with the matter.”

  7. One little gem in Clarence Thomas’s opinion: he cited Taney’s opinion in Dred Scott for the proposition that if blacks were citizens they would have the right to bear arms. Even Taney recognised the right, he said, which was part of Taney’s rationale for holding that blacks could not be citizens. Very mischievous.

    1. I missed that. Yes unarmingly sneaky.
      Basically Thomas is using the current BLM perspective of racial rights to justify the right to bear arms for all American citizens — and that to argue otherwise is raaaciiist.

      1. No, Mespo, you’re counting the Colonial era.

        George Washington took office in 1789 and slavery was abolished in 1863. That’s only 74 years.

        What’sore, it’s insulting to Blacks that you even made that comparison. New York’s Gun Restrictions were not a serious hardship.

Leave a Reply