Civic Register
| 7.7.22 
what's the story
The Supreme Court vacated decisions by appeals courts in four cases concerning state gun control laws and remanded them for reconsideration based on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
At issue in the four cases are state restrictions on firearm magazine capacity limits, an assault weapons ban, and open carry.
What did the Supreme Court hold in Bruen?
In Bruen, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling along ideological lines that overturned the state of New York’s requirement that law-abiding residents seeking a concealed carry permit to possess a handgun in public for self-defense “show proper cause” and “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.”
Bruen held that New York’s “special need” requirement violated the Fourteenth Amendment because it prevented law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
It expanded upon and clarified prior Supreme Court precedent under Heller, which held that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, by ruling that there is a constitutional right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.
The decision also emphasized its use of the Court’s text, history, and tradition test adopted in Heller and affirmed by McDonald. The test requires the government to demonstrate that firearm regulations are consistent with the country’s historical tradition of firearm regulations.
Bruen held that New York’s “special need” requirement violated the Fourteenth Amendment because it prevented law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
It expanded upon and clarified prior Supreme Court precedent under Heller, which held that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, by ruling that there is a constitutional right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.
The decision also emphasized its use of the Court’s text, history, and tradition test adopted in Heller and affirmed by McDonald. The test requires the government to demonstrate that firearm regulations are consistent with the country’s historical tradition of firearm regulations.
No comments:
Post a Comment