Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to New York Gun Law | Voice of America

Second Amendment

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a challenge to a New York City law restricting the rights of handgun owners to carry their weapons outside the home.

The 6-3 decision sends the case back to the lower courts — a move that pleases gun control advocates who were afraid that the conservative-majority court would rule against them.

The case centered on the New York City gun licenses that let handgun owners carry their locked and unloaded weapons only from their homes to several shooting ranges within city limits.

Attorneys for the city argued that the law was a matter of public safety and did not infringe on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

A group of gun owners, backed by Trump administration lawyers, challenged the law, arguing that it was too restrictive.

But after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, New York amended the law to allow people to carry their guns to places outside the city, including second homes, gun clubs, target shooting ranges and where hunting is allowed.

The court decided not to hear the case Monday, saying the changes to the law makes the challenge moot, and sent it back to the lower court for any further challenges and arguments.

Three conservative justices — Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas — dissented.

“Petitioners got most, but not all, of the prospective relief they wanted,” Alito wrote, saying gun owners can still seek damages.

Gun control advocates are pleased the court decided not to rule on the case.

“Today’s decision rejects the NRA’s invitation to use a moot case to enact its extreme agenda aimed at gutting gun safety laws supported by a majority of Americans,” said Hannah Shearer, litigation director at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

But the National Rifle Association, the country’s premier gun rights group, said the court Monday accepted what the NRA calls New York City’s “surrender” and admission of wrongdoing. It calls on the city to reimburse the plaintiffs’ legal fees.

Affordable Care Act ruling

In another case, the court ruled 8-1 Monday in favor of health insurance companies seeking $12 billion from provisions in the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” that allows them to collect losses incurred by offering coverage to uninsured Americans.

The court threw out a lower court decision that ruled Congress had suspended the payment provision.

Writing for the majority, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said denying payment to the insurance companies would be a “bait and switch.”

“The government should honor its obligations,” Sotomayor wrote.

Alito was the only dissenter, writing that paying off “has the effect of providing a massive bailout for insurance companies that took a calculated risk and lost.”

The provision that would reimburse insurance companies for losses was in effect under the Affordable Care Act from 2014 until 2016.

Source link

Articles You May Like

Dianne Feinstein Remembered as ‘Trailblazer’
Hunter Biden to appear in court for arraignment after indictment on felony gun charges
Dianne Feinstein, California’s first woman in Senate, dies
NRA mocks Biden’s new ‘gun violence prevention’ office with advice on its name
Women Deserve to Live in a Nation Free of Gun Violence: The Ms. Q&A with Kris Brown


  1. 329455 703760Thanks for the details provided! I was finding for this info for a long time, but I wasnt able to uncover a reliable source. 611435

  2. 643181 936238This style is steller! You certainly know how to maintain a reader amused. Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved to start my own weblog (well, almostHaHa!) Fantastic job. I really enjoyed what you had to say, and more than that, how you presented it. Too cool! 226288

  3. 50513 969160I genuinely enjoy your site, but Im having a dilemma: any time I load one of your post in Firefox, the center with the web page is screwed up – which is bizarre. Might I send you a screenshot? In any event, maintain up the superior work; I surely like reading you. 107685

  4. 369437 832392After examine a couple of of the weblog posts on your internet site now, and I genuinely like your manner of blogging. I bookmarked it to my bookmark web site record and will probably be checking back soon. Pls take a look at my internet page as effectively and let me know what you think. 511727

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *