Following the US Supreme Court ruling, states prepare to fight over gun control laws

The Supreme Court ruling overturning a New York gun licensing law has prompted states with heavy gun restrictions to respond on two fronts: understanding what covert transportation measures they might impose, as they prepare to defend a ‘ wide range of gun control policies

The language of opinion of the court’s majority has escalated concerns that other state laws, from setting an age limit for gun purchases to banning high-capacity ammunition magazines, may now be in jeopardy.

“The court has called for opening hunting season against our gun control laws, so I anticipate litigation across the board,” said acting New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, a Democrat.

“We will defend our gun laws tooth and nail because these gun laws save lives,” he added.

Mixed opinions

The court ruling issued on Thursday expressly canceled a New York law which had been in place since 1913 and required people applying for a concealed carry permit to demonstrate the specific need to have a weapon in public, as proof of an imminent threat to their safety.

The conservative majority of the court said this violates the Second Amendment, which it interprets as a protection of people’s right to carry a self-defense gun outside the home.

Although the ruling does not concern other laws, the majority opinion opens the doors to defenders of gun rights challenge them in the futuresaid Alex McCourt, director of legal research at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

Pro-gun groups in several states have said they want to do just that.

This was stated by attorney Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association the group is preparing to broaden its legal challenges on the grounds that the High Court changed the legal criteria used to assess whether gun control laws are constitutional.

Courts now only need to assess whether a gun control regulation is consistent with the text of the Second Amendment and its historical interpretation, according to Thursday’s ruling.

Previously, judges could also take into account a state’s social justification for adopting a gun control law.

Michel said the rule will affect three important California laws. Legal challenges to state limits on assault weapons, its request for background checks on ammunition purchases, and its ban on the sale of ammunition online are pending in a federal appeals court.

“All these laws should be overturned according to this new Supreme Court criterion,” he said.

The Supreme Court is also considering examining California law banning ammunition magazines with more than 10 rounds, as well as a similar law in New Jersey.

Michel expects the court to evaluate these rules under the new standard.

The new restrictive landscape for gun control laws outlined in the majority opinion on Thursday is not without loopholes for states, particularly those who want to impose some limits on hidden transportation permits.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, said states can still require people to obtain a gun license and condition it to requirements such as background checks and mental health medical history.

They can also restrict where guns are allowed, which implies that states can ban firearms in “sensitive places” such as schools, courts or polling stations.

Chance

This opens up an opportunity for state governors and lawmakers in New York and six other states with similar covert transportation laws: California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.

In California, lawmakers are amending the law to expand the requirements people must meet to obtain a covert transportation permit and to define where guns would be prohibited. The revised bill will have its first hearing on Tuesday, and lawmakers hope to quickly send it to Governor Gavin Newsom, who called Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling shameful.

Other Democratic governors, lawmakers, and attorneys general have also pledged to support or amend their gun laws.

Most state legislatures are closing sessions or have already closed it, so any response will likely have to wait until next year.

Rhode Island Democratic State Representative Robert Craven, who is an attorney, said he will study opinion in the New York case to determine whether or not it raises concerns about whether Rhode Island’s requirements can be challenged and whether it can remedy through the laws.

He wondered whether the High Court will now use a restrictive interpretation of the Second Amendment – that the right to bear arms is absolute – and apply it to other laws, such as those banning military-type weapons.

“I see the court moving in that direction,” Craven said.

In Hawaii, Democratic State Senator Chris Lee said lawmakers will seek to understand how else they can ensure public safety and will look into screening, calling for training requirements and enforcement measures to keep guns out of certain public places. provisions that, according to the judges of the Supreme Court, would be allowed.

“In short, Hawaii is about to become a more dangerous place,” said Democratic State Senator Karl Rhoads.

“Hawaii will go from being a place where the right to carry a gun in public is an exception to a place where not having the right to carry a gun on the street is an exception. I don’t see any restrictions on the type of weapon to be used. fire. “, he added.

Gun rights groups in Hawaii and elsewhere applauded the ruling.

In Maryland, Mark Pennak, chairman of a gun rights advocacy group that challenges that state’s covert transportation law, said he was “absolutely entranced” by the high court’s decision because “there is no way” for it. law can continue to be respected.

Democratic leaders in the Maryland General Assembly have said they will approve aA law that respects the new precedent but continues to protect the inhabitants.

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy, a Democrat, criticized the court’s view for limiting how states can address gun proliferation in public, but vowed to protect state gun control measures. . He said his administration believes the state can continue to regulate who can carry hidden weapons and where they can carry them.

He promised that his administration “will do everything in our power to protect our residents.”

Jennifer McDermott, Associated Press

Translation: Elisa Carnelli

ap