Opinion of the Court SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 20–843 NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS v. KEVIN P. BRUEN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UcuL5brBWtNlnBahN1QwQsagiJ4Rz3jG/view?usp=sharing

Opinion of the Court

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 20–843

NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS v. KEVIN P. BRUEN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

[June 23, 2022]

JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guaran­tees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government offic­ers some special need. That is not how the First Amend­ment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.

New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Four­teenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further pro­ceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

ALITO, J., concurring (pages 70-78)

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring (79-81)

BARRETT, J., concurring (pages 82-83)

BREYER, J., dissenting (pages 84-135)

REFERENCE:

Supreme Court Rejects New York Special Need Limitation on Carrying a Firearm, Affirms Inherent Right to Carry

June 23, 2022 | Sundance

In a 6-3 ruling [pdf HERE] the Supreme Court has ruled that New York state cannot require an individual to prove a “special need” in order to carry a firearm for self-protection.  The ruling, likely to have ramifications for other gun restricting states, affirms the constitutional right of an individual to carry a firearm, and blocks the efforts of states to make the individual prove they have a need for one.