Exit the New York State exception. This Thursday, the US Supreme Court, the highest court, strengthened the gun law in New York State, just one month after Uvalde’s killing that left 21 dead.
Seized by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and two of its members, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the right to carry a concealed firearm outside the home. A decision taken with six conservative votes against three liberals.
Until then, and by a law enacted in 1911 and clarified in 1913, it was necessary, in addition to a gun license, to justify a “valid cause” to covertly transport a gun outside New York State . “A concept left to the appreciation of the authorities, that’s the whole problem,” assures Didier Combeau, US expert and author of “The Americans and Firearms” (Belin).
What does the Supreme Court ruling say?
Concretely, New York State residents will no longer have to justify this “good reason” for surreptitiously carrying a firearm outside their homes. The Supreme Court ruled that the New York State legislation violated the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees equality among citizens, since not all US citizens have equal gun rights.
“The second and fourteenth amendments to the Constitution protect the right of an individual to carry a gun in self-defense outside the home,” also congratulated the conservative judge Clarence Thomas, announcing the verdict.
What changes?
“Not everyone will be able to carry a weapon outside,” assures Marie-Christine Bonzom. The possession of the permit will in fact always be mandatory, requiring, among other things, to be of age. But, for Didier Combeau, once the conditions necessary to obtain it have been met, “the State of New York should be forced to issue the permits since it will no longer be able to make discretionary decisions”.
This Supreme Court ruling could also have consequences in the other six states (including California, which denounced a “shameful” and “dangerous” decision) where similar legislation is in force. “The decisions of the Supreme Court are precedents, advances Didier Combeau. Legislation in other states will be considered unconstitutional. In fact, they will have no choice but to adapt.”
What reactions?
Kathy Hochul, the Democratic Governor of New York State, was among the first to protest Thursday morning, denouncing an “absolutely scandalous” decision. An opinion shared by the mayor of New York City, also a Democrat, Eric Adams. “We will continue to do everything we can to work with our federal, state and local partners to keep our city safe,” she said on his Twitter account.
Same story for US President Joe Biden who says he is “deeply disappointed”. In a statement, the US Department of Justice reaffirmed his determination to “save innocent lives by enforcing and upholding federal gun laws.”
For its part, the American gun lobby, the NRA, hailed “a turning point for the righteous men and women of America and the result of decades of struggle.”
Towards a two-speed legislation?
Just hours after the Supreme Court decision, the Senate passed a law limiting access to firearms. This text, which will be voted on Friday by the House of Representatives, provides in particular for the strengthening of criminal and psychological background checks for people under 21 who wish to buy a gun.
“In reality we have a judiciary and another legislative power that are not on the same wavelength”, analyzes Marie-Christine Bonzom, who recalls that “ultimately, it is the Supreme Court that interprets the laws”. A court today made up of six conservative and three liberal judges, all appointed for life.
A situation that pushes Anne Deysine, lecturer and author of “The United States and Democracy” (L’harmattan), to think that “the restrictive measures taken or that could be taken by the Democrats risk being, one after another, declared as unconstitutional.” Thus preventing any further restrictions on the issue of arms in the United States.
