SCOTUS vacates NY Circuit Court gun control ruling

ALBANY, N.Y. (NEXSTAR) — On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated a ruling from the Second Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals in a case about New York's Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). After that case—"Antonyuk, Ivan, at al. v James, Steven G., et al."—the Gun Owners of America (GOA) argued that the circuit court misinterpreted and misapplied a previous Supreme Court decision, and the Supreme Court agreed.

The effect of this ruling on New York gun laws going forward remains to be seen. It connects to several other current and historic cases weighing public safety standards against legal interpretations of the Second Amendment. In the 2021 Bruen decision, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Empire State imposed unconstitutional requirements in its World War I-era concealed carry permit law, making petitioners prove "proper cause" to be armed.

"We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need," that decision read. New York also failed to prove the measure “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” SCOTUS said, despite generations of precedent.

That ruling left the constitutionality of several gun control acts in many states in limbo. Here in New York, the legislature and Gov. Kathy Hochul responded with the CCIA. Among other things, it required that someone demonstrate their good morals, provide character references, link to social media, list household members, pass a safety course, and submit to an interview with law enforcement to concealed carry.

"The Supreme Court has once again been forced to correct the Second Circuit's error in a Second Amendment case," said Randy Kozuch, the Executive Director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "New York's so-called 'Bruen response' bill is a direct rejection of the Supreme Court's decision in 'Bruen,' and the Court's order has put that law on a path to being inevitably struck down as a violation of New Yorkers' right to keep and bear arms."

In November 2022, U.S. District Judge Glenn Suddaby in Syracuse issued an injunction on parts of the CCIA, targeting its "sensitive locations" doctrine as too broad. He said that New York acted outside of its authority when it banned carrying a firearm in courts, places of worship, libraries, museums, summer camps, at protests, on public transit, and more.

That injunction came about due to the legal filings from Second Amendment groups like GOA. “New York’s anti-gun politicians were quick to double down after the Bruen decision, but today they’ve been smacked down again," read a statement from Senior Vice President Erich Pratt released this week in response to the recent "Antonyuk" decision. "With the High Court making clear the Second Circuit got it wrong and by remanding the case back to the lower court, the High Court is forcing New York’s politicians to eat a huge plate of humble pie. We look forward to continuing the fight for New Yorkers’ right to carry—without government pre-requisites.”

In December 2023, the Second Circuit upheld much of the CCIA. That was until another Supreme Court matter, "U.S. v. Rahimi," ruled on June 21 that barring subjects of domestic violence restraining orders from firearms would not violate the Second Amendment. That ruling had reversed a Fifth Circuit decision that erred on the side of granting the right to bear arms to accused domestic abusers.

Chief Justice John Roberts riddled the Rahimi decision with references to "Bruen," particularly the traditional aspect of firearm regulation. "As we said in Bruen, a 'historical twin' is not required," he wrote. "Since the founding, our Nation's firearm laws have included regulations to stop individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms. As applied to the facts here, [the statute] fits comfortably within this tradition."

Based on the Rahimi ruling, the Supreme Court sent back eight cases to their lower circuit courts "for further consideration in light of United States v. Rahimi." And another case dealing with guns—specifically ghost guns—will go before the court in the next term. In that case, "Garland v. VanDerStok," New York Attorney General Letitia James joins 24 other attorneys general pushing to uphold federal regulations already on the books.

In the Antonyuk matter, vacating the lower court ruling did not appear to automatically put Suddaby's "sensitive locations" injunction back in place. Reached for comment on the matter, a spokesperson from James's office said, "The law is still in effect, including the sensitive locations provision, and will be re-litigated in the Second Circuit."

According to New York State Sen. Dan Stec—a Republican representing the 45th District—vacating the Antonyuk decision represents "a major victory for lawful gun owners." He said, "Now that it has been remanded to a lower court for further examination, I look forward to that court fully striking down this ill-conceived, hyper-partisan and unconstitutional law.”

During the legislative session that just ended in the New York State Capitol, legislators focused on passing even more gun control bills. They include S7392A/A7555A, the Firearm Public Health and Safety Dangers Act.