NEW YORK\u00a0\u2014\u00a0No guns for Elmo, Spider-Man or anyone else in New York\u2019s Times Square \u2014 and don\u2019t try sneaking them into the subway, either.<\/p>\n
That was the decision Friday from a federal appeals court, effectively upholding a New York state law that bars firearms in \u201csensitive\u201d locations \u2014 including the tourist mecca known as \u201cthe crossroads of the world,\u201d the New York City subway system and commuter trains.<\/p>\n
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court judge\u2019s 2023 ruling that let the state law remain in effect after several gun owners filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of some restrictions. An appeals court ruling last year has allowed other parts of the law to remain in effect.<\/p>\n
The plaintiffs, Jason and Brianna Frey and William Sappe, had sought a preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of provisions in the law, known as the Concealed Carry Improvement Act, that have allowed authorities to declare Times Square a gun-free-zone, ban open carry and require a special permit to carry guns in New York City.<\/p>\n
U.S. District Judge Nelson Stephen Roman rejected that request, leading to the appeal decided Friday.<\/p>\n
A three-judge 2nd Circuit panel ruled that the challenged restrictions fall within the country\u2019s \u201chistorical tradition of gun regulations and, thus, do not violate the Second Amendment\u201d right to bear arms. The plaintiffs, they concluded, are \u201cunlikely to succeed on the merits\u201d of their arguments.<\/p>\n
Times Square gun ban consistent with history, judges say<\/p>\n
Banning guns in Times Square, a swath of midtown Manhattan that is often teeming with sightseers and costumed movie and cartoon characters posing for pictures, is similarly consistent with history dating to medieval England of \u201cprohibiting firearms in quintessentially crowded places,\u201d the judges wrote in a unanimous opinion. The same holds for the subway and the Metro-North commuter rail service, which connects the city with northern suburbs and Connecticut.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere is perhaps no public place more quintessentially crowded than Times Square,\u201d the judge said, describing the brightly lighted, billboard-lined area as \u201cour modern-day, electrified, supersized equivalent of fairs, markets, and town squares of old.\u201d<\/p>\n
Despite that, Judges Robert D. Sack, Reena Raggi and Joseph F. Bianco noted that they were not determining \u201cthe ultimate constitutionality of the challenged provisions.\u201d They returned the case to Roman\u2019s court for further proceedings.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Second Circuit decision is disappointing, but not unexpected considering its palpable disdain for the Second Amendment,\u201d said Amy Bellantoni, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.<\/p>\n
New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, whose office defended the law in court, said in a statement: \u201cNew Yorkers deserve to feel safe on public transportation and everywhere in our state, and today\u2019s decision affirms that right.<\/p>\n
\u201cCommon-sense gun laws save lives, keep guns out of sensitive community spaces, and help address the gun violence crisis,\u201d said James. \u201cNew York has some of the strongest common-sense gun laws in the nation, and my office will continue to defend them and protect New Yorkers.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ruling is the latest one upholding New York law<\/p>\n
Friday\u2019s decision is the latest court ruling allowing the Concealed Carry Improvement Act to remain in place. The New York law was signed in 2022 as the state\u2019s answer to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that some of its previous gun regulations were unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and state lawmakers rewrote the regulations after the high court struck down the state\u2019s longstanding requirement that people demonstrate an unusual threat to their safety to qualify for a license to carry handguns outside the home.<\/p>\n
Last year, the 2nd Circuit upheld other parts of the law, including requirements that concealed carry permit applicants demonstrate good moral character, disclose the names of household and family members, submit to an in-person interview, provide character references and undergo 16 hours of training. <\/p>\n
In that ruling, the appeals court also upheld provisions banning the concealed carry of firearms in certain sensitive places and allowing private property owners to post signs prohibiting guns on their property.<\/p>\n
Federal appeals courts around the country have ruled similarly in other states, including Hawaii and Virginia, and on Sept. 10, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld New Jersey\u2019s ban on guns in sensitive places like schools and public gatherings. Those judges also cited a historical tradition of gun regulation, writing that for certain \u201cdiscrete locations\u201d the presence of guns was \u201chistorically regulated as jeopardizing the peace or posing a physical danger to others.\u201d<\/p>\n
Sisak writes for the Associated Press. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"NEW YORK\u00a0\u2014\u00a0No guns for Elmo, Spider-Man or anyone else in New York\u2019s Times Square \u2014 and don\u2019t try…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":241323,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5122],"tags":[5229,78111,128925,42439,7614,128926,6616,405,403,5226,5225,5228,5227,128922,6566,18746,128924,69588,128923,128927,9307,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":{"0":"post-241322","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-new-york","8":"tag-america","9":"tag-appeal-court","10":"tag-decision-friday","11":"tag-firearm","12":"tag-gun","13":"tag-gun-regulation","14":"tag-judge","15":"tag-new-york","16":"tag-new-york-city","17":"tag-newyork","18":"tag-newyorkcity","19":"tag-ny","20":"tag-nyc","21":"tag-other-part","22":"tag-place","23":"tag-plaintiff","24":"tag-provision","25":"tag-state-law","26":"tag-subway-ban","27":"tag-three-judge-2nd-circuit-panel","28":"tag-times-square","29":"tag-united-states","30":"tag-united-states-of-america","31":"tag-unitedstates","32":"tag-unitedstatesofamerica","33":"tag-us","34":"tag-usa"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115236400277323688","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241322","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=241322"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241322\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/241323"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=241322"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=241322"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=241322"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}