Supreme Court Won’t Hear Challenge to New York State Gun Law

The decision leaves in place a lower court ruling that struck down some provisions in the state law but upheld others.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul speaks during a press conference in New York City on Nov. 14, 2024. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court on April 7 denied a challenge to a restrictive New York state gun law that was passed to counter the court’s landmark gun ruling in 2022.

The court’s decision not to hear Antonyuk v. James came in an unsigned order. No justices dissented. The court did not explain its order.

The Supreme Court ruling leaves intact a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision from October 2024 that struck down some provisions in the state law but upheld others.

The Supreme Court ruled in June 2022 in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen that there was a constitutional right to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense.

Specifically, the court invalidated the state’s requirement that a carry permit applicant must demonstrate a special need for self-defense.

Bruen also held that gun restrictions must be consistent with the American historical tradition of firearm regulation.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said the Bruen decision was “a reckless decision ... senselessly sending us backward and putting the safety of our residents in jeopardy.”

New York legislators responded to the ruling by enacting the sweeping Concealed Carry Improvement Act, which came into force on Sept. 1, 2022.

The law inhibits the public-carry right articulated in Bruen by designating much of the Empire State as so-called sensitive areas, or gun-free zones, making them off-limits to concealed weapons. Critics said there were so many prohibited places that it would be hard for carry permit holders to go about their daily business in public.

Airports, establishments that serve alcohol, day care facilities, playgrounds, schools, entertainment venues, libraries, hospitals, houses of worship, polling locations, public demonstrations and rallies, public transit, and Times Square, a tourist mecca in the New York City borough of Manhattan, are on the list.

The state law also requires carry permit applicants to show “good moral character,” take a gun safety course, and provide information from their social media accounts for background checks.

In its ruling, the Second Circuit upheld the good moral character requirement, finding that the act’s definition of “character” was “a proxy for dangerousness: whether the applicant, if licensed to carry a firearm, is likely to pose a danger to himself, others, or public safety.”

The circuit court quoted from United States v. Rahimi, a June 2024 Supreme Court decision: “Since the founding, our Nation’s firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms.”

In Rahimi, the high court upheld a federal gun control law that bars people under domestic violence-related restraining orders from possessing firearms.

“For as long as licensing has been used to regulate privately-owned firearms, issuance has been based on discretionary judgments by local officials,” the Second Circuit stated.

“Licensing that includes discretion that is bounded by defined standards, we conclude, is part of this Nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulation and therefore in compliance with the Second Amendment.”

At the same time, the appeals court upheld a federal district court injunction blocking enforcement of the state law as to “private property open to the public.”

Petitioner Ivan Antonyuk filed the Supreme Court appeal in January, saying he wanted to be able to carry firearms outside the home.

Antonyuk’s petition argued that the state legislation conflicts with Bruen, which held that the Second Amendment “guarantees a general right to public carry.”

“Intent on maintaining its de facto prohibition on public carry, New York decided that, if it must issue carry licenses after Bruen, it would discourage applicants by imposing novel and onerous licensing requirements, and then discourage license holders by declaring most of the State a ‘sensitive location’ off-limits to firearms,” the petition reads.

The Second Circuit erred when it upheld the statute’s requirement that individuals “convince licensing officials of their ‘good moral character’ prior to licensure, defined as ‘having the essential character, temperament and judgement necessary to be entrusted with a weapon,’” according to the petition.

On Feb. 26, the state urged the Supreme Court to deny the petition, arguing that it was brought prematurely because the case is still ongoing in the lower courts.

Hochul praised the new Supreme Court decision, a move that she said would ensure that “the core tenets of the law [she] signed in 2022 will remain in effect.”

“New York’s strong gun safety laws save lives, and gun violence has declined by 53 percent since a pandemic-era peak,” the governor said in a statement.

On behalf of the Gun Owners Foundation, which was part of Antonyuk’s legal team, Sam Paredes said the group would fight on.

“Make no mistake—this isn’t the end,” Paredes told The Epoch Times.

“The Second Circuit’s decision ... is part of a broader campaign to resist Bruen and deny lawful Americans their rights. The Supreme Court may have passed on this case at this preliminary stage, but we are confident that the justices will soon address the growing defiance of the lower courts.”