ThinkingAfield.org

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— Attorneys representing New York resident Brett Christian have filed a memorandum of law with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, opposing a motion by the defendants for a summary judgment, and supporting their cross-motion for summary judgment in a case supported by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Firearms Policy Coalition.

The case, known as Christian v. Chiumento, challenges New York state’s continuing prohibition on lawful concealed carry in public parks and all private property open to the public. Christian is represented by attorneys David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C. and Nicolas J. Rotsko at FLUET in Tyson’s, Virginia.

“New York has been trying to dance around the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling in what amounts to a painful exercise in legal acrobatics,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This case, which has been dragging along for a couple of years, illustrates the ridiculous lengths to which New York state has been going in order to keep its laws active which are clearly is not allowed under Bruen, which rejected ‘interest balancing’ in tests of Second Amendment restrictions.” Read more

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, rebukes legislation proposed by Massachusetts House and Senate lawmakers that would denigrate the Second Amendment to a state-granted privilege and do nothing to hold criminals accountable for the criminal misuse of firearms.

State lawmakers negotiated a compromise through a closed-door conference committee and no input from the firearm industry, releasing the bill with just two weeks left in the session. However, this bill is anything but a compromise. It runs roughshod over the fundamental rights to keep and bear arms by creating unconstitutional age-based gun bans, magazine bans and subjects lawful firearm owners to onerous licensing requirements and searchable databases that compromise privacy.

“After nearly a year, in the state where the American Revolution began, Massachusetts legislators are seeking to rush through a 111-page bill that will do nothing to stem violence in the Commonwealth and will only create a bloated bureaucratic mess that impacts law-abiding gun-owners,” said Jake McGuigan, NSSF’s Government Relations – State Affairs Managing Director. “The legislature had the opportunity to do something truly special with a strong bill to address violence. Instead, the bill aims to suppress the exercise of the Second Amendment by implementing onerous training requirements just to purchase a firearm, bans all of the most commonly-used guns in America and implements a draconian gun registration scheme that criminals will ignore. It even makes it illegal for a 15-year-old Boy Scout to use a .22 caliber rifle to earn a merit badge. Judges continue to set free criminals in the Commonwealth while the legislature makes law abiding citizens immediate felons.”

The negotiated legislation now includes, among other restrictions: Read more

Attorneys representing two New York state residents challenging the state’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” have filed a memorandum in support of their earlier motion for summary judgment.

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Firearms Policy Coalition are supporting the case, known as Lane v. Rocah. The case challenges the ban on so-called “assault weapons” in New York state. This motion also opposes a cross-motion from the defendants for summary judgment Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Adam Kraut at the Second Amendment Foundation in Bellevue, Wash., Cody J. Wisniewski in Las Vegas, and Nicholas J. Rotsko at FLUET in Tysons, Va. The memorandum was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

In their memorandum, SAF attorneys show the state is relying on arguments which are either easily discredited, or essentially nullified by the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling in 2022 which rejected “interest balancing” in tests of Second Amendment restrictions.

“The state is trying to make arguments which have already been rejected by the Supreme Court,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “New York’s arguments reflect a stubborn resistance to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the 2022 Bruen ruling.”

“New York is arguing that modern semiautomatic rifles are ‘dangerous and unusual,’ merely because they resemble military weapons,” noted SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Yet, such firearms are in common use across the country for all types of legitimate use, from personal and home defense to competition, hunting and recreational shooting.” Read more