BY JEFF CHUDZINSKINorth Country This Week

CANTON -- A gun rights case with ties to the North Country now sits before the U.S. Supreme Court who must decide if they intend to hear legal arguments this fall.

According to court documents filed with the Court, Antonyuk v. James, was docketed on Jan. 27, 2025 following the filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari filing.

A writ of certiorari is a legal document that requests a higher court review a lower court's decision, in this case with the Supreme Court reviewing a decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Antonyuk case is one that has been in the works since 2022 following the passage of the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). That bill, passed along party lines following the Buffalo Tops Supermarket shooting and Uvalde, Texas, school shooting, has placed a number of restrictions on lawful gun ownership in New York.

Among them are requirements to take an 18-hour course prior to applying for a concealed carry license, a list of “sensitive spaces” off limits to lawful concealed carry, a “good moral character” clause when applying for a concealed carry license and a requirement to have such a license to purchase a semi-automatic rifle, among others.

Following conflicting rulings by the Northern District Court and Second Circuit, attorneys have sought an opinion from the Supreme Court.

New York Attorney General Letitia James commended the Appellate court after they decided to uphold the CCIA last year.

“We have a right to enact common sense measures to protect our communities, and I am pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision to allow New York’s concealed carry gun law to remain in effect. Too many New Yorkers are plagued by gun violence, and we know that basic gun laws help save lives every day. My office will continue to use every tool at our disposal to protect New Yorkers and defend our responsible gun laws," she said.

Among them, new requirements were put in place for lawful concealed carry license holders and applicants.

St. Lawrence County Attorney Steve Button, who has been working "of counsel" on the case since Oct. 2022 said Gun Owners of America believe they have a strong case that has implications for St. Lawrence County residents.

He previously told NCTW GOA felt they had a strong legal argument that fell in line with the famous "Bruen decision" from 2022, which largely overturned New York's 109-year-old concealed carry laws.

The Bruen decision Button spoke of comes from the landmark case NYSRPA v. Bruen that the Supreme Court ruled on, greatly expanding gun rights and the definition of the 2nd Amendment.

Under the ruling, many gun rights organizations have since launched lawsuits against state lawmakers, arguing laws passed to ban "assault rifles" and high capacity magazines, among others, violate the 2nd Amendment.

Now with the case before the Supreme Court, the Justices must weigh the merits of GOA's arguments and the state's counter claims.

In particular, GOA argues that splits in the lower court decisions to either upend the CCIA or maintain the new laws, coupled with legal precedents from 1791 or 1868 interpretations should persuade the Court to overturn the laws.

They also argue that citizens should not be forced to "persuade the government to 'entrust' them with enumerated rights," such as those in the Second Amendment.

GOA attorneys also argue the State's morality test conflicts with Rahimi's rejection of "irresponsibility" as a pretext to deny rights.

In U.S. v. Rahimi, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit said a federal law that prohibits convicted felons from having guns was unconstitutional as applied.

The case revolves around a ruling that saw Zack Rahimi lose his Second Amendment rights following a felony conviction.

Rahimi was convicted of possessing a gun while he was the subject of an order of protection stemming from a domestic violence charge.

According to police, Rahimi allegedly assaulted his domestic partner in a parking lot and shot a gun after he saw bystanders had witnessed the alleged assault.

Despite the circumstances of the arrest and conviction, Rahimi challenged the law, saying it was a violation of his Second Amendment rights.

In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Rahimi by an 8-1 margin, saying his felony conviction precluded him from purchasing and possessing a firearm, especially with an order of protection filed against him by his former domestic partner.

A "good moral character" clause in the CCIA was also called into question by GOA, who argue that such character judgements and "vague terms" should not provide a basis for disarmament.

They also argue that such provisions could be susceptible to abuse or used "as a smokescreen to deny licenses" on bases of "lifestyle or political preference."

Help St. Lawrence County Stay Connected!

We’re glad you read this article reported by the staff of NorthCountryNow.com.

If you haven’t done so already, please consider subscribing to ensure you have full access to all the news and info about St. Lawrence County.

Your subscriptions make it possible for us to provide trustworthy local news, promote our many community events, and encourage community dialogue.

Please click here to subscribe today!