The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear a challenge to New York’s ban on concealed carry firearms in certain “sensitive locations.”
The decision comes on the heels of another favorable ruling for gun control advocates last month, Breitbart reported.
The ban was enacted following the landmark 2022 Bruen decision that broadened Second Amendment protections for New Yorkers.
The Concealed Carry Improvement Act outlaws guns in places like parks, entertainment establishments, churches, health care facilities, and others.
New York Attorney General Letitia James touted the ruling in a post to X.
“We will always stand up for commonsense gun safety laws that protect New Yorkers and keep our communities safe,” she wrote.
The Supreme Court has once again denied a request to hear challenges to New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act.
We will always stand up for commonsense gun safety laws that protect New Yorkers and keep our communities safe.https://t.co/6xNNEGby2D
— NY AG James (@NewYorkStateAG) April 7, 2025
The law was another route for the deep-blue states to restrict Second Amendment rights.
With the Bruen decision, there was a danger that people in the Empire State could exercise their Constitutional rights, which made politicians uncomfortable.
According to the Associated Press, the law restricted not only where gun owners could carry weapons but also required proof that they were of “good moral character” to have a gun.
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law with certain provisions struck down.
Gun rights advocates are rightly outraged that any part of the law was upheld.
“While we are disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision not to take this case, we will never stop fighting to defend the rights of gun owners across the country,” said Erich Pratt, Gun Owners of America senior vice president.
At least the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case means the parts struck down are out for good, including requiring permission to carry on private property from the owner.
“At least as to private property open to the public (the subject of this motion), New York’s restriction is unconstitutional,” U.S. District Court Judge John Sinatra, Jr., a Trump appointee, wrote, according to Fox News.
“Regulation in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the new enactment is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations,” Sinatra wrote at the time.
“New York fails that test here.”
The latest decision from the Supreme Court is perhaps part of a troubling trend.
As The Hill reported, the high court recently upheld a law outlawing so-called “ghost guns.”
In a 7-2 decision on March 26, the high court shockingly decided that these do-it-yourself gun kits would remain banned.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) enacted the regulation during former President Joe Biden’s administration.
In his majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch said:
“Future cases may present other and more difficult questions about ATF’s regulations.
“But we take cases as they come, and today resolve only the question posed to us.”
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, explaining they would have struck down the regulation entirely.
“Congress could have authorized ATF to regulate any part of a firearm or any object readily convertible into one,” Thomas said in his dissenting opinion.
“But, it did not. I would adhere to the words Congress enacted.”
The court leans conservative, but these recent decisions are gravitating toward gun control, typically favored by the leftists.
At least parts of New York’s law remain struck down by the lower court’s decision.
READ MORE – Supreme Court Rules Trump Can Deport Illegals Using Alien Enemies Act
