U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) announced the filing of an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court in the case of NYSRPA v. Corlett, a case involving the right to bear arms in public. The brief is available at FPCLegal.org.
New York State forbids ordinary law-abiding citizens to carry a firearm outside the home without a license. To acquire a licence, an applicant must demonstrate a “proper cause.” This requires more than just a desire to exercise the right protected by the Second Amendment. It requires more than a desire to protect one’s self or family, more than good moral character and the want to carry a weapon, and more than living or working in a high-crime area. Instead, “proper cause” requires an applicant to demonstrate “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.” So by its very definition, ordinary citizens are prohibited from exercising the right.
After the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld New York’s licensing scheme, the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case. FPC and FPF’s amicus brief supported the petition, which is the Court’s first opportunity to hear a carry case since Justice Barrett’s confirmation.
The brief was authored by FPC’s Director of Constitutional Studies, Joseph Greenlee. It is FPC’s second Supreme Court brief filed in the last week.
“By now, nearly every federal circuit court has addressed the right to bear arms in public,” said FPC’s Joseph Greenlee. “They have taken a variety of approaches in deciding the cases, and they have reached an even greater variety of outcomes. Currently, whether the right to bear arms exists, and what it protects, differs from state-to-state and sometimes even county-to-county. Constitutional rights should protect everyone equally, and we hope that the Court will use this opportunity to reinforce that.”
About Firearms Policy Coalition
Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend constitutional rights—especially the right to keep and bear arms—advance individual liberty, and restore freedom through litigation and legal action, legislative and regulatory action, education, outreach, grassroots activism, and other programs. FPC Law is the nation’s largest public interest legal team focused on Second Amendment and adjacent fundamental rights including freedom of speech and due process, conducting litigation, research, scholarly publications, and amicus briefing, among other efforts.
About Firearms Policy Foundation
Firearms Policy Foundation (www.firearmsfoundation.org) is a grassroots 501(c)3 nonprofit public benefit organization. FPF’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the People’s rights, privileges, and immunities deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition—especially the inalienable, fundamental, and individual right to keep and bear arms.
Since the supreme court didn’t intervene when some states changed the way voters could access the way to vote and extended voting days without legislation agreed too by their state elected legislators as the law requires in those states, I don’t think anything that comes out of the supreme court means a darn thing anymore.
We already know that criminals don’t pay any attention to the laws thats why there are called criminals when caught.
Laws only keep honest people honest and infringes on some god given rights in the process.
Heller and the related cases were chosen carefully by the court to deal with “the right to keep … arms” of the 2nd Amendment. They really do appear to have intended to next deal with “the right to … bear arms.” The anti-gunners would have us believe the the words “to keep and bear arms” to mean at most “to own arms.” But the fact that the court chose to take cases dealing only with “keep” tells me the intend to separately deal with cases dealing only with “bear.” Given the current composition of the court, I expect that they… Read more »
don’t forget they ALSO swore in another “elected” officer who is patently and eminently NOT qualified to hold HER current office, and will be equally unqalified to hold the one for which she was really “elected”. Camelnose-under-the-tent was born to two paretns, NEITHER of whiom were US Citizens t the time of her birth. READ Artocle Two, bey plain this is NOT ALLOWED. Where were SCOTUS on that little oversight”?
First things first. RIGHTS come to mankind from the LORD. Our RIGHT to keep and bear arms comes from SCRIPTURE and it’s further written into law as our constitution. A RIGHT is NOT something like a driver’s license, a privilege, that can be taken away for infractions. No Sir, a RIGHT is unalienable. See our declaration of indepence. Our government has no right to deny or delay any free American citizen of their RIGHTS. The RIGHT to life, the RIGHT to liberty, the RIGHT to pursue happyness, the RIGHT to keep and bear arms, the RIGHT to assemble PEACEABLY, the… Read more »
Concealed carry is not a #2A right. That cert petition is D.O.A. like every concealed carry cert petition before it and like every concealed carry cert petition to follow.
What the hell does any of their stupidity have to do with gun rights or defense? Why does Ammoland allow such ignorance to be published here?