NEW YORK — Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund (“Everytown”) and Moms Demand Action, the grassroots volunteer network of Everytown for Gun Safety, today released the following statements after the Supreme Court issued its opinion in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York, a challenge to a since-repealed New York City gun rule brought by the state chapter of the National Rifle Association:
“As the NRA loses ground in the court of public opinion, it is increasingly turning to the court of law for a bailout,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown. “Fortunately, the Supreme Court just thwarted the gun lobby’s hope for a broad ruling that could slow the gun safety movement’s growing momentum.”
“This ruling should come as a relief to every American worried about keeping their family safe from gun violence,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action. “The NRA and its allies are losing everywhere from state legislatures to boardrooms, which means the courts are their last hope. But they’ll keep losing there too, because the courts have ruled time and again that common-sense gun laws are constitutional.”
“The Supreme Court declined the invitation to adopt the NRA’s extreme and dangerous interpretation of the Second Amendment,” said Eric Tirschwell, managing director of Everytown Law, the litigation arm of Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. “As courts across the country have repeatedly made clear, life-saving gun safety laws are fully consistent with the Second Amendment.”
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc et al. v. City of New York is a case challenging already-repealed New York City regulations limiting the locations to which holders of a license to possess a handgun in their homes could transport their handguns both within and outside the city. Despite the City’s repeal of the rules, and despite a new state law preventing them from being reenacted, the NRA hoped to use this case to roll back gun safety legislation nationwide.
The former New York City rules prohibited holders of city premises licenses from transporting firearms to gun ranges, shooting competitions, and second homes outside the city. Restrictions as strict as those former rules do not exist anywhere else in the United States, nor is there an effort to implement similar regulations anywhere.
This case is the first major Second Amendment case to be before the Supreme Court since District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. City of Chicago in 2010. While the Supreme Court had not heard a major Second Amendment challenge in nearly a decade, the appellate courts have been very active. They have developed a consistent and effective approach to interpreting the constitutionality of gun violence prevention measures, one that protects both rights and public safety.