This led to a flurry of temper tantrums from lawmakers in anti-gun jurisdictions, particularly New York. A special session was called for state legislators to craft a response to the high court, and that they did.
But on Friday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals struck down some of the more egregious sections of the New York law.
One provision which was tossed aside was the burdensome signage requirement. Most states mandate that private property owners post notifications that concealed carry is prohibited, but New York reversed this policy.
Instead, the right to bear arms for legal carry permit holders was presumed to be banned unless the property owners expressly notified the public of their permission through posted signage.
Another of the offensive requirements set forth by New York lawmakers was mandating that carry permit applicants hand over access to their social media accounts to authorities.
The challenges heard by the federal appeals court were consolidated from several legal filings, including two from the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). They were Hardaway v. Chiumento and Christian v. Chiumento.
The Christian case challenged the requirement of posting signs if gun carry was permitted. The appeals court rejected this action, noting that the activity prohibited is “carrying a firearm for personal protection on private property.”
This, the judges ruled, clearly “falls within the Second Amendment right to carry.”
Violators of this law faced up to four years in prison.
The Hardaway case confronted the banning of carrying weapons in places of worship. After a sharp outcry from the very worshipers the legislature claimed to be protecting, the legislature amended this provision. Part of their motivation came from a pair of lawsuits filed by the SAF and the Firearms Policy Coalition.
There is a very real possibility that New York’s gun control overreach will land in the Supreme Court.
