Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that it has filed a new federal lawsuit challenging New York’s ban on firearm carry by residents of other states. The complaint in Shaffer v. Quattrone can be viewed at firearmspolicy.org/shaffer.
Shaffer v. Quattrone Background:
The lawsuit, brought by several Pennsylvania residents and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), targets provisions of New York’s firearm licensing laws that exclude non-residents from obtaining permits to carry or possess firearms. This despite changes to New York’s laws following the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen—which affirmed the right to carry firearms for self-defense publicly—the state retained residency requirements in its licensing framework. These restrictions prevent non-residents from applying for permits unless they have a principal place of employment in New York.
The plaintiffs argue that this “Non-Resident Ban” violates their rights under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution. They contend that law-abiding citizens do not forfeit their constitutional rights when crossing state lines and that New York’s policy unjustly discriminates against non-residents seeking to exercise their right to self-defense.
The case argues the broader legal question of whether states can impose residency-based restrictions on constitutionally protected rights like the right to bear arms. The plaintiffs seek a declaration that the residency requirement is unconstitutional and an injunction preventing its enforcement.
“Citizens do not lose protection of their rights under the First Amendment’s speech or religion clauses when they cross state lines,” states the complaint. “Nor do they lose their protections under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. Likewise, they do not surrender their Second Amendment protected rights when they travel outside their home state.”
“We will continue to teach Governor Hochul that the right to keep and bear arms doesn’t end at New York’s borders,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “We look forward to ending New York’s immoral ban on carry by non-residents and allowing millions of peaceable people to exercise their rights as they visit the Empire State.”
The Shaffer case is part of FPC’s high-impact strategic litigation program, FPC Law, aimed at eliminating immoral laws and creating a world of maximal liberty. FPC is joined in the litigation by four FPC members. FPC thanks FPC Action Foundation for its strategic support of this FPC Law case.
Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org), a 501(c)4 nonprofit membership organization, exists to create a world of maximal human liberty, defend constitutional rights, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom. We work to achieve our strategic objectives through litigation, research, scholarly publications, amicus briefing, legislative and regulatory action, grassroots activism, education, outreach, and other programs. Our FPC Law program (FPCLaw.org) is the nation’s preeminent legal action initiative focused on restoring the right to keep and bear arms throughout the United States. Individuals who want to support FPC’s work to eliminate unconstitutional laws can join the FPC Grassroots Army at JoinFPC.org or make a donation at firearmspolicy.org/donate. For more on FPC’s lawsuits and other pro-Second Amendment initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, X (Twitter), Facebook, and YouTube.
Well, we׳re going to see whether the new president along with a Republican congress could bring concealed carry reciprocity to reality. We might live to see NY senator, Chuck Schumer display public fits as he watches much of his life work go down the drain.
Republicans can fix this in all 50 states if they don’t show what a bunch of spineless POS they really are .
A businessman who normally goes about armed,as is his RIGHT, cannot enter the State of New York whilst armed lawfully in his home or most other states.
This situation falls afoul of the Interstate Commerce Clause. He cannot ravel, say, by car or public ransportaion, into New York Sate to conduct his business.
Stick that one on Hoe Chool”s pipe and light it. She thinks she is the Queen of Sheba or some such. Being governor does NOT allow her to set policy, this is the job of the legislature.
So, do I lose my right to free speech when I cross state lines? My right to trial by jury? My right to confront accusers? So why do I lose my right to keep and bear arms when I cross a state line? I think it is a fair question. If you come to my little mountain town here in Arizona you will notice loads of cars from CA on our roads. Do they lose their driving privileges when they cross in to Arizona? Of course not. But depending upon the Republican Party to represent any fundamental rights issue is… Read more »
This is already fixed as part of the fallout from a GOA case: https://www.gunowners.org/wp-content/uploads/Emergency-Gun-License-Rules-8.8.24.pdf The NY AG agreed this despite NY Penal Law 400 still blocking carry access for non-NYers. True, it’s only for NYC permits but since that’s the only one that covers the whole state, that’s the one we want. The issue GOA raised that caused them to fold like a wet noodle was Rahimi. Huh? Yeah. The Rahimi decision starts with three pages on how violently batshit insane Mr Rahimi is. It then says that states can disarm somebody like that *based on their documented violent past… Read more »