U.S. Judge Temporarily Blocks Parts Of New York's New Gun Law

A federal judge in New York on Thursday temporarily blocked parts of the state's new gun law to allow the Gun Owners of America, an advocacy group, to pursue a lawsuit challenging the legislation.

The order marks one of the most prominent victories by gun-owners' rights groups in challenging gun restrictions around the United States since June's landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that said for the first time that Americans have a constitutional right to carry weapons in public.

New York's law came into effect on Sept. 1 and is being closely watched by other states around the country where gun violence has become recurrent. It establishes new requirements for obtaining a license, including submitting social media accounts for review, and creates a long list of public and private places where having a gun became a felony crime, even for license holders.

Lawmakers in the state's Democratic-controlled legislature had passed the law during an emergency session in July after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision also found the state's licensing regime for firearms to be unconstitutional following a challenge by the New York affiliate of the National Rifle Association, a powerful gun-owners' rights group.

Chief Judge Glenn Suddaby of the U.S. District Court in Syracuse agreed to issue the order at the request of six New York residents who are members of Gun Owners of America, which competes with the National Rifle Association in political influence.

He said his order would not take effect for three days to allow the New York government to appeal his ruling in a higher court. The offices of the governor and the New York attorney general, whose lawyers are defending multiple challenges to the law in courts across the state, did not respond to requests for comment.

Suddaby last month ruled that much of the new law was unconstitutional when he dismissed an earlier lawsuit filed by Gun Owners of America in which he found neither the group nor an individual member of it had standing to sue before the law came into effect. The group subsequently filed a second lawsuit advancing similar arguments but with additional plaintiffs.

New York's legislative leaders and Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, had said they were appalled by June decision by the U.S. Supreme Court's conservative majority. They warned that more people carrying guns in public would lead to more gun violence.

Still, they agreed to strip out a provision in the state's law that the Supreme Court said wrongly gave subjective discretion to government officials to deny gun permits to New Yorkers.

'SENSITIVE LOCATIONS'

At the same time, the state's new Concealed Carry Improvement Act also added new restrictions and requirements. It says applicants must submit their social media accounts for review by a government official and provide at least four character references.

Suddaby's order forbids the state from enforcing those new licensing provisions.

The lawsuit filed by Gun Owners of America members against the governor and other state law-enforcement officials say the new requirements violate the constitutional rights to freedom of speech and assembly.

The new list of 'sensitive locations' where carrying a gun is a felony is extensive. It includes schools and colleges, government buildings, medical facilities, public transit, bars or restaurants serving alcohol, "the area commonly known as Times Square" and parks.

Suddaby's order sharply reduced the list of sensitive places: He said schools, colleges and government buildings may remain sensitive places under the new law, but many other categories could not.

The law also made it a felony to have a gun on someone's private property unless the owner or lessee has posted a sign saying guns are welcome, assuming the property in question is not also a sensitive location, such as a bar or doctor's office. Suddaby threw out this provision making an exception only for private fenced-in farmland.

"Rather than concocting this extensive list of so-called 'sensitive locations,' it would probably have been easier for the legislature to list the places that New York, in its grace, does allow ordinary law-abiding citizens to exercise their rights," the plaintiffs said in the lawsuit.

They called the new law an attempt by state lawmakers "to impose retribution on New York gun owners for successfully challenging its prior statute."

The New York attorney general's office in its response said the Supreme Court ruling allowed for laws that are "consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation," and defended the new state law as being "firmly grounded in Anglo-American history and doctrine."