Asian Reporter web extra, June 23, 2022
People walk by a memorial for the victims of the Buffalo supermarket
shooting outside the Tops Friendly Market on May 21, 2022, in Buffalo,
New York. In a major expansion of gun rights after a series of mass
shootings, the Supreme Court said Thursday that Americans have a right
to carry firearms in public for self-defense, a ruling likely to lead to
more people legally armed. Ten people were killed and three wounded in
the racially motivated shooting at the Buffalo supermarket. (AP
Supreme Court expands gun rights, with nation divided
By Jessica Gresko
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a major expansion of gun rights after a series
of mass shootings, the Supreme Court said Thursday that Americans have a
right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, a ruling likely to
lead to more people legally armed. The decision came out as congress and
states debate gun-safety legislation.
About one-quarter of the U.S. population lives in states expected to
be affected by the ruling, which struck down a New York gun law. The
high court’s first major gun decision in more than a decade split the
court 6-3, with the court’s conservatives in the majority and liberals
Across the street from the court, lawmakers at the capitol sped
toward passage of gun legislation prompted by recent massacres in Texas,
New York, and California. Senators cleared the way for the measure,
modest in scope but still the most far-reaching in decades.
Also Thursday, underscoring the nation’s deep divisions over the
issue, the sister of a 9-year-old girl killed in the school shooting in
Uvalde, Texas, pleaded with state lawmakers to pass gun legislation. The
Republican-controlled legislature has stripped away gun restrictions
over the past decade.
President Joe Biden said in a statement he was "deeply disappointed"
by the Supreme Court ruling. It "contradicts both common sense and the
Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all," he said.
He urged states to pass new laws. "I call on Americans across the
country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the
line," he said.
The decision struck down a New York law requiring people to
demonstrate a particular need for carrying a gun in order to get a
license to carry a gun in a concealed way in public. The justices said
that requirement violates the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority that the Constitution
protects "an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense
outside the home." That right is not a "second-class right," Thomas
wrote. "We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may
exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special
California, Hawai‘i, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode
Island all have laws similar to New York’s. Those laws are expected to
be quickly challenged.
Governor Kathy Hochul (D-N.Y.), said the ruling came at a
particularly painful time, with New York mourning the deaths of 10
people in a racially motivated shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo.
"This decision isn’t just reckless. It’s reprehensible. It’s not what
New Yorkers want," she said.
Gun safety groups called the decision a significant setback. Michael
Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice and an expert on
the Second Amendment, wrote on Twitter that the decision could be the
"biggest expansion of gun rights" by the Supreme Court in U.S. history.
Republican lawmakers were among those cheering the decision. Tom
King, president of the plaintiff New York State Rifle and Pistol
Association, said he was relieved.
"The lawful and legal gun owner of New York State is no longer going
to be persecuted by laws that have nothing to do with the safety of the
people and will do nothing to make the people safer," he said. "And
maybe now we’ll start going after criminals and perpetrators of these
The court’s decision is somewhat out of step with public opinion.
About half of the voters in the 2020 presidential election said gun laws
in the U.S. should be made more strict, according to AP VoteCast, an
expansive survey of the electorate. An additional one-third said laws
should be kept as they are, while only about 1 in 10 said gun laws
should be less strict.
About 8 in 10 Democratic voters said gun laws should be made more
strict, VoteCast showed. Among Republican voters, roughly half said laws
should be kept as they are, while the remaining half closely divided
between more and less strict.
In a dissent joined by his liberal colleagues, Justice Stephen Breyer
focused on the toll from gun violence.
Since the beginning of this year, "there have already been 277
reported mass shootings — an average of more than one per day," Breyer
wrote. He accused his colleagues in the majority of acting "without
considering the potentially deadly consequences" of their decision. He
said the ruling would "severely" burden states’ efforts to pass laws
"that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms
of different kinds."
Several other conservative justices who joined Thomas’ majority
opinion also wrote separately to add their views.
Justice Samuel Alito criticized Breyer’s dissent, questioning the
relevance of his discussion of mass shootings and other gun death
statistics. Alito wrote that the court had decided "nothing about who
may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to
buy a gun" and nothing "about the kinds of weapons that people may
"Today, unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear they
will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves." The Second
Amendment, he said, "guarantees their right to do so."
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, noted
the limits of the decision. States can still require people to get a
license to carry a gun, Kavanaugh wrote, and condition that license on
"fingerprinting, a background check, a mental health records check, and
training in firearms handling and in laws regarding the use of force,
among other possible requirements."
Backers of New York’s law had argued that striking it down would lead
to more guns on the streets and higher rates of violent crime. Gun
violence, on the rise during the coronavirus pandemic, has spiked anew.
Gun purchases have also risen.
In most of the country, gun owners have little difficulty legally
carrying their weapons in public. But that had been harder to do in New
York and the handful of states with similar laws. New York’s law, in
place since 1913, says that to carry a concealed handgun in public, a
person applying for a license has to show "proper cause," a specific
need to carry the weapon.
The state had issued unrestricted licenses where a person could carry
a gun anywhere and restricted licenses allowing a person to carry the
weapon but just for specific purposes such as hunting and target
shooting or to and from their place of business.
The challenge to the New York law was brought by the New York State
Rifle & Pistol Association, which describes itself as the nation’s
oldest firearms advocacy organization, and two men seeking an
unrestricted ability to carry guns outside their homes.
The Supreme Court last issued a major gun decision in 2010. In that
decision and a ruling from 2008, the justices established a nationwide
right to keep a gun at home for self-defense. The question for the court
this time was just about carrying a gun outside the home. Thomas, who
turned 74 on Thursday, wrote in his opinion that: "Nothing in the Second
Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the
right to keep and bear arms."
Associated Press reporters Mark Sherman, Hannah Fingerhut, and Zeke
Miller in Washington and Michael Hill in East Greenbush, New York,
contributed to this report.
Read the current issue of The Asian Reporter in
Just visit <www.asianreporter.com/completepaper.htm>!