Friday, March 29, 2024

Supreme Court Reaffirms Second Amendment Rights In Latest Decision

-

“May-issue” crumbles after ruling in New York Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen

Today the released an opinion in the case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen.

In a 6-3 decision, the majority of Justices decided that New York's requirement of an individual to “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community” in order to carry a firearm outside the home is unconstitutional.

issued the court's majority opinion. He was joined by Justices Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito, and Barrett. Justices Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan made up the dissent.

Read the Ruling Here: New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc, Inc v. Bruen

In the majority opinion, Thomas wrote that “New York's proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and
bear in public for self-defense.”

This ruling could have far-reaching implications. Other jurisdictions such as Washington, DC have a similar threshold of burdening individuals by requiring them to prove their need to carry firearms outside the home. Maryland and also fall into the category of “may issue” states and their laws could be next on the chopping block.

In the dissenting opinion, Justice Breyer wrote that he believes “the Court wrongly limits its analysis to focus nearly exclusively on history. It refuses to consider the interests that justify a challenged gun regulation, regardless of how compelling those interests may be.”

The National Rifle Association () celebrated the decision, tweeting that the decision confirms one of the organization's long-held beliefs: that “the right to self-defense and to defend your family and loved ones should not end at your home.”

Congressman Steve Scalise – House Republican Whip – shared a similar sentiment via Twitter.

Missouri Senator Josh Hawley called out his colleagues for working to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights while the Supreme Court upheld them.

Victoria Snitsar Churchill
Victoria Snitsar Churchill
Victoria Snitsar Churchill is a proud immigrant and naturalized U.S. citizen with a decade of experience in grassroots politics and community organizing. Her writing has been featured in many online publications, including Campus Reform, The Daily Torch and The Daily Signal. As an undergraduate at the University of Kansas, Victoria appeared in media outlets such as CBS News, TIME Magazine, The Washington Post Magazine, The Blaze and NRATV. Victoria is also a former NCAA D1 student-athlete and Kansas College Republicans State Chair. After moving eleven times in six years, Victoria resides in Arlington, Virginia and enjoys overpriced brunch on Sundays with her husband.

5 COMMENTS

  1. AOL BRINGS THE READERS TO ALL COMMUNIST HEADLINERS, AP, REUTERS, YAHOO THE WORST, USA-USSR TODAY.THEY REDUCE THE TRUTH TELLERS TO MAKE THEIR GARBAGE LOOK LIKE IT IS THE AGREEING MAJORITY. CHECK IT OUT. TYPE THREE WORDS. TRUMP IS LOVE. THEY BLOCK BY EMAIL ADDRESS. ANY SOCIAL WEBSITE THAT HAS A C IN IT. THE C STANDS FOR COMMUNIST. ALWAYS BE COMMUNIST ABC. COMMUNIST BULL SCHIFF CBS. NOTHING BUT COMMUNISTS NBC. COMMUNIST NUT NETWORK-CNN. YOU THINK THAT’S BAD. WATCH THIS. DEMOCRATZIS ARE FLAG BURNERS.

    https://youtu.be/hGthgVd3i0E
    MEET MATCH MCCONEEL THE FLAG BURNER.

  2. The breakdown of the vote shows, once again, that the Leftists on the Court want to restrict Constitutional rights while the Conservatives on the Court are freedom loving pro Americans.
    Win one for the good guys & gals!

  3. The reason it struck down all the democrat cities bogus rules is because they were completely unconstitutional! But we know democrats care nothing about the constitution, only how they can bypass it or just trash it. They are a satanic cult who is an agressive enemy from within! They must be destroyed!

  4. It’s disheartening that the Second Amendment even _needs_ reaffirmation. How can “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” possibly be misconstrued? To paraphrase George Orwell, only the “intelligentsia” question this simple phrase; normal people aren’t that foolish.

    “There is none so blind as he who _will not_ see!” ~ John Heywood, circa 1546

    Let’s go, Brandon! Remember in November.

Comments are closed.

Latest News