The Supreme Court case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen revolves around gun control laws in New York. Under these laws, individuals were required to obtain a licence for handgun ownership, and if they wished to carry it in public, they had to demonstrate a valid reason for doing so. The Court deemed this law unconstitutional as it granted the government the power to arbitrarily deny individuals their right to own a firearm. Additionally, the Court ruled that future courts cannot employ “means-end” tests to assess gun restrictions. Consequently, any government seeking to limit gun ownership must establish that it aligns with the historical tradition of gun ownership in America. While some Justices dissented, arguing that gun control is a multifaceted matter best left to state legislatures for resolution.
The Supreme Court case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen addresses the interpretation of the Second Amendment. It reaffirms the precedent set in District of Columbia v. Heller and prohibits the use of “means-end” tests when evaluating the constitutionality of firearm restrictions. The case involves a New York gun control law that requires individuals to obtain a licence before obtaining a handgun. These licences are specific to certain uses, and individuals seeking a licence to carry a handgun in public must demonstrate “proper cause” for a heightened need of self-protection compared to the general population. Permits are issued on a “may-issue” basis, giving government officials the final say on whether “proper cause” is shown. The Supreme Court rules that the New York law is unconstitutional because it issues licences on a “may-issue” basis instead of a “shall-issue” basis. A “may-issue” licensing system allows the government to deny a citizen a firearm at its discretion, contradicting the central holding of District of Columbia v. Heller. The Court also rejects the “two-step” analysis used by many jurisdictions to determine the constitutionality of gun restrictions. Justice Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Roberts, emphasizes that Bruen does not intend to invalidate “shall-issue” licensing structures or other restrictions on firearm ownership, such as fingerprinting, background checks, mental health evaluations, mandatory training requirements, and potential other requirements. Justice Barrett writes a separate concurrence that agrees with the opinion but highlights two unresolved issues that the court may need to address in the future. Justice Breyer, joined by Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor, dissents, arguing that using a “means-end” test is appropriate. For example, in New York, individuals who want to carry a handgun in public for self-protection must demonstrate “proper cause” for a heightened need. If government officials deem their general desire for self-protection insufficient, they will be denied a licence. Two parties challenged this law in court after being denied a public carry licence due to officials deeming their general desire for self-protection as insufficient “proper cause.” The Supreme Court ultimately rules that the law is unconstitutional because it issues licences on a “may-issue” basis instead of a “shall-issue” basis.
The NYSRPA v. Bruen case is a legal challenge to New York’s concealed carry licensing scheme, specifically the requirement to show “proper cause” to obtain a concealed carry permit.
As of 2022, the case is pending before the United States Supreme Court. Oral arguments have been heard, and a decision is expected to be issued in the near future.
The main legal issue in this case is whether New York’s “proper cause” requirement for obtaining a concealed carry permit violates the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
The outcome of this case could potentially impact the ability of gun owners in New York to obtain concealed carry permits. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of NYSRPA, it could lead to a loosening of the “proper cause” requirement.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case could have broader implications for other states with similar concealed carry laws. It could potentially set a precedent for evaluating the constitutionality of “proper cause” requirements across the country.
The NYSRPA argues that New York’s “proper cause” requirement is overly restrictive and effectively denies law-abiding citizens their Second Amendment rights. They contend that self-defence alone should be considered sufficient cause to obtain a concealed carry permit.
The state of New York argues that the “proper cause” requirement is necessary to ensure public safety and prevent the proliferation of firearms. They contend that the requirement strikes a balance between individual rights and the state’s interest in regulating firearms.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case could potentially provide guidance on the level of scrutiny to be applied when evaluating Second Amendment challenges. It could clarify the standard for evaluating the constitutionality of gun control measures.
The Supreme Court could either uphold New York’s “proper cause” requirement, strike it down as unconstitutional, or issue a narrower ruling that provides guidance on the application of the Second Amendment to concealed carry laws.
The exact date for the Supreme Court’s decision is uncertain, but it is expected to be issued sometime in 2022.
This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
This glossary post was last updated: 17th April 2024.
To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.
- Page URL:https://dlssolicitors.com/define/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-nysrpa-v-bruen-2022/
- Modern Language Association (MLA):New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (Nysrpa) V. Bruen (2022). dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. May 09 2024 https://dlssolicitors.com/define/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-nysrpa-v-bruen-2022/.
- Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (Nysrpa) V. Bruen (2022). dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. https://dlssolicitors.com/define/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-nysrpa-v-bruen-2022/ (accessed: May 09 2024).
- American Psychological Association (APA):New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (Nysrpa) V. Bruen (2022). dlssolicitors.com. Retrieved May 09 2024, from dlssolicitors.com website: https://dlssolicitors.com/define/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-nysrpa-v-bruen-2022/
Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.
All author posts