BY JEFF CHUDZINSKINorth Country This Week

CANTON -- A Federal judge for the Western District of New York has struck down part of Governor Kathy Hochul's Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) that aimed to ban firearms on all publicly open private property.

The news of the legal ruling in Christian v. James was long awaited after the legal challenge was filed in the wake of the restrictive legislation passed in 2022.

The CCIA was passed by state legislators and Governor Kathy Hochul in "direct retribution" to the U.S. Supreme Court overturning New York's 109-year-old concealed carry laws.

The legislation created new requirements to obtain a concealed carry license and governed firearm ownership in general, including a 16-hour course with two hours of range time, an extensive list of spaces where firearms are prohibited, the requirement to disclose all social media information to law enforcement when applying for a concealed carry license, the requirement to disclose all firearms and persons in the home, along with a “good moral character” clause that gave licensing officers broad discretion of what constitutes “good moral character.”

Under the CCIA, the law made it a felony for concealed-carry license holders to possess a firearm on all private property, unless the relevant property holders actually permitted the possession of a firearm by use of a sign or by express consent.

"The State has not established that its sweeping prohibition of carriage on private property open to the public 'is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms'," court documents state.

With the ruling now enjoining the state's ban on carrying firearms on publicly accessible private property, state officials have signaled they will continue the fight, possibly through new legislation.

Governor Kathy Hochul said state lawmakers were ready to "double down" on the lawsuit and other legislation that was recently signed into law.

"Lawmakers came up with legislation. And we have a prohibition on concealed carry weapons in sensitive places. I personally think every place is sensitive," Hochul said at a recent press conference.

Firearms Policy Coalition leaders praised the ruling, saying it was a major step forward for gun owners.

“This is yet another important victory for Second Amendment rights and another major loss for New York, authoritarian governments, and radical anti-rights organizations like Everytown and Giffords. We will continue to fight forward as we work to restore the full scope of the right to keep and bear arms throughout the United States. Hopefully Kathy Hochul is ready to write another check for legal fees,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.

The Western District's ruling has struck another blow to the CCIA, just three months after the Supreme Court remanded another case, Antonyuk v. James, back to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals for another decision that falls more in line with the Bruen decision of 2022. 

St. Lawrence County Attorney Steve Button, who is working as counsel with Gun Owners of America on the Antonyuk case, said there is no timetable for the 2nd Circuit to rule on the case again but is confident in the legal merits of the argument.

"This case has significant consequences not only for the citizens of St. Lawrence County, but for New York State in general. With the Supreme Court now weighing in and remanding the case back to the 2nd Circuit, we feel that our legal arguments are strong and fall in line with the Bruen decision," he said.

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.

Button said cases are now weighed against a historical analogue that must be consistent with those passed at the founding of the nation and when the 2nd Amendment was ratified in 1791.

In many cases, state lawmakers and attorneys general have since pivoted to an 1868 interpretation of the laws, arguing that post-Reconstruction Era urban centers were on the rise and further restrictions on firearms became necessary for the safety of the public.

But critics of that interpretation say those laws were founded in racist rhetoric as governments sought to keep firearms out of the hands of Native Americans, freed slaves and former Confederate soldiers and sympathizers who may harbor those allegiances post-Civil War.

He also commented that no supporting documents or amicus brief can be filed by stakeholders not directly involved in the litigation. 

In remanding the case back to the lower court, the Supreme Court vacated the original decision issued by the 2nd Circuit that upheld most aspects of the CCIA, in essence reverting back to a Northern District court decision from Justice Glenn T. Suddaby that largely ruled the CCIA to be unconstitutional until the 2nd Circuit weighs in again.