X

State walking back provisions of new gun control law, says St. Lawrence County Attorney

Posted 5/18/23

BY JEFF CHUDZINSKI North Country This Week State officials are walking back numerous provisions of the Concealed Carry Improvement Act after gun right groups pressed forward with multiple lawsuits in …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

State walking back provisions of new gun control law, says St. Lawrence County Attorney

Posted

BY JEFF CHUDZINSKI
North Country This Week

State officials are walking back numerous provisions of the Concealed Carry Improvement Act after gun right groups pressed forward with multiple lawsuits in recent months.

In Antonyuk v. Nigrelli, state officials came under fire for sensitive space provisions, training requirements to obtain a concealed carry license, requirements to disclose co-habitants on applications, as well as a “good moral character” clause that gives broad discretion to licensing officers to deny applications.

St. Lawrence County Attorney Steve Button has been working “of counsel” on Antonyuk since Oct. 2022 after county legislators approved his participation in the case.

According to Button, state officials have amended state statutes that permits persons responsible for security in houses of worship to carry firearms.

Court documents show that state officials say they will permit concealed carry in houses of worship by security personnel “even if they do not satisfy the statutory exemptions enumerated in Penal Law § 265.01-e(3).”

The change comes after various challenges to houses of worship being listed as a sensitive space, prohibiting lawfully licensed concealed carry holders from carrying firearms in such spaces.

Federal Judge Glenn Suddaby ruled last year that the inclusion of houses of worship on the sensitive spaces list was a violation of an individual’s First and Second Amendment rights.

During recent oral arguments in front of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, state officials once again came under fire for the inclusion of houses of worship, with multiple justices on the panel also arguing the inclusion of houses of worship violated an individual’s First and Second Amendment rights.

State officials also amended state statute that expressly prohibits firearms in public parks.

The issue of having firearms in public parks has been extensively argued since the CCIA was first announced last June, with Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, State Senator Dan Stec and Assemblyman Billy Jones all arguing that numerous cultural events would be adversely impacted by the new laws.

Reenactments, historical events, gun shows that benefit volunteer fire departments and funeral processions of military veterans were all affected by the new laws, leading to heavy criticism.

At the heart of the issue was the possibility that residents who live in the Adirondack Park would be considered felons simply for owning a firearm and living within the park.

The statute update now clarifies that individuals who live in the Catskill and Adirondack Parks may own firearms and hunters may carry firearms on private property, as well as forest-preserve land.

The updated statutes also exempt retired and current law enforcement from the CCIA regulations, another change that many advocated for since last June.

State officials have codified the new statutes through the recently passed state budget in hopes of mooting the legal challenge, though the Second Circuit has afforded Gun Owners of America an opportunity to respond.

According to Button, the statute says GOA must respond “promptly” but there is no specific timeline. Button said he expects a response will be filed in the next couple of days.

The response will seek a continuation of the ongoing lawsuit, with GOA arguing that the changes have not resolved the numerous issues brought forth in their Antonyuk case.

Various other legal challenges to the CCIA are also ongoing based on new standards set by the Supreme Court’s NYSRPA v. Bruen decision last year.

The Supreme Court ruled in NYSRPA v. Bruen that the state’s 113-year-old concealed carry laws are unconstitutional requirements for licensing, leading state officials to pass the CCIA in retribution.

Justices also ruled that modern firearms, including AR-15 style rifles, are covered under the Second Amendment along with all ancillary products required to use such firearms.

Based on that standard, a legal challenge to New York’s “assault weapon ban” has been filed by the Firearms Policy Coalition, which is contesting that the state’s “assault weapon” ban is unconstitutional based on the Bruen decision last year.

That case, known as Lane v. James, is in the early stages with two motions from the state last week to have the case dismissed. FPC is expected to file a counter in the near future.