Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver

California's premier full-service law firm with an emphasis on the representation of peace officers in disciplinary, criminal, labor, workers' compensation, personal injury and other civil matters.

  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Maritime Law
    • Estate Planning
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Career Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer

US Supreme Court Delivers Landmark 2nd Amendment Ruling

June 23, 2022 by Hien Nguyen

[Click here for print-friendly PDF]
The United States Supreme Court has struck down a New York handgun-licensing law that required New Yorkers who want a permit to carry a concealed handgun in public to show a special need to defend themselves. Today’s 6-3 ruling written by Justice Clarence Thomas is the Court’s first significant decision on gun rights in over a decade.

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Supreme Court considered whether a New York state law requiring anyone who wants to carry a concealed handgun outside the home to show “proper cause” for the license was unconstitutional. New York courts interpreted “proper cause” to require applicants to show more than a general desire to protect themselves or their property. Instead, applicants must demonstrate a special need for self-defense such as a pattern of physical threats. The lower courts upheld the New York law against a challenge from two men whose applications for concealed-carry licenses were denied.

In holding New York’s law unconstitutional, the Supreme Court noted that the Second Amendment right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees,” noting that the exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. According to the Court, 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 arms in public.

The Supreme Court’s decision appears to apply only to handguns, and does not prohibit states from imposing licensing requirements for carrying a handgun for self-defense. Forty-three states already employ objective “shall-issue” licensing requirements. The Court’s decision addresses only the unusual discretionary licensing schemes, known as “may-issue” regimes, that grant open-ended discretion to licensing officials and authorizes licenses only for those applicants who can show some special need apart from ordinary self-defense. Those features, the Court indicated, in effect unconstitutionally deny the right to carry handguns for self-defense to many “ordinary, law-abiding citizens." It is anticipated the Court’s decision may likely impact California’s discretionary licensing statutes.

Disclaimer: Case law and analysis can change over time. The information in this article is accurate as of the date the article was written and should not constitute legal advice. Always consult with an attorney.

Filed Under: Bulletins, Client Alert Tagged With: michael a morguess, robert-m-wexler, timothy-k-talbot

Consultation Form

Offices across California to serve you.
Contact us now to schedule a consultation.
Contact form not loading? Click here!
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC publishes this website as a service to our clients and other friends for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be used as a substitute for specific legal advice or opinions, and the transmission of information through this website is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between sender and receiver. Internet subscribers and online readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

© 2023 Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver, PC. All Rights Reserved. | Disclaimer

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Do not sell my personal information.
Cookie settingsACCEPTREJECT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Contact Us

  • News Alerts

Official logo for Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver
Rains Lucia Stern St. Phalle & Silver Logo
  • About Us
  • Practice Areas
    ▼
    • Labor Representation
    • Civil Litigation
    • Personal Injury
      ▼
      • Example of Case Results
    • Workers’ Compensation
    • Maritime Law
    • Estate Planning
    • DOE Security Clearance Hearings
    • Peace Officers
    • Firefighters
    • EMS Agency Investigations
    • Criminal Defense
    • CalPERS Appeals
  • Our Team
  • Classes
  • Media
    ▼
    • Bulletins
    • RLS in the News
  • Resources
    ▼
    • Links
    • Resources
    • Newsletters
  • Clients
  • Career Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
Hotline phone numbers. Northern California: 925-609-1699. Southern California: 310-393-1486.