A federal choose has dominated in opposition to Legal professional Common Letitia James and different New York officers, rejecting their movement to dismiss a constitutional problem to the state’s ban on bulletproof vests and protecting physique armor.
U.S. District Court docket Choose John Sinatra Jr. affirmed plaintiffs standing to sue the state over the restrictions.
“Right here, plaintiffs have demonstrated an harm the truth is…They allege an intention to interact in a course of conduct arguably protected by the Second Modification however proscribed by New York regulation,” Sinatra wrote in a 19-page ruling.
Whereas New York is not any stranger to violating Second Modification rights beneath the guise of “public security,” the physique armor ban appears to be like notably dangerous for the state as armor can solely be used as a defensive measure for safeguarding life however not as a weapon. Actually, within the state’s personal phrases, physique armor is outlined as “any product that may be a private protecting physique protecting supposed to guard in opposition to gunfire, no matter whether or not such product is to be worn alone or is offered as a complement to a different product or garment.”
If there was ever any query about whether or not the anti-Second Modification agenda was about public security or public vulnerability and defenselessness, this situation places that debate to relaxation.
The present ban doesn’t have an effect on these thought-about ‘grandfathered’ in, having bought physique armor earlier than the restrictions. I’m positive New York didn’t need the authorized headache of an tried confiscation. By the way in which, if shopping for used or through money, how would the state know when a person made their buy? In fact, the regulation doesn’t apply to regulation enforcement officers both. There are literally fairly a number of individuals the regulation doesn’t apply to, and should you’d prefer to know whose life the state of New York values greater than yours, that record could be discovered right here.
Firearms Coverage Coalition filed the lawsuit within the U.S. District Court docket in Buffalo alleging that the restrictions violate the Second Modification rights of a number of defendants represented by the group. Plaintiffs within the lawsuit, together with New Yorkers who wish to buy physique armor, argue that they’ve a “elementary, constitutionally protected proper to maintain and bear arms, together with physique armor.” Moreover, they search a everlasting injunction to dam any enforcement of the ban whereas contested.
The physique armor ban, authorized by New York lawmakers as a part of a gun management bundle that pushed by means of the Democratic-controlled Legislature following the landmark U.S. Supreme Court docket Bruen choice in 2022, is a contemptuous transfer contemplating directions laid out by the excessive courtroom for dealing with issues associated to the Second Modification. Plaintiffs’ attorneys cite a “deeply rooted custom of protecting and carrying armor in America” and an absence of “historic restrictions,” arguments which quote and are completely aligned with Bruen.
Firearms Coverage Coalition president, Brandon Combs, says the lawsuit is aimed toward, “educating New York one other lesson about constitutionally protected rights.”
New York has develop into a frequent flyer for lawsuits filed by the FPC and different Second Modification teams due to the state’s eagerness to deprive law-abiding residents of their constitutional rights. Whereas I’m grateful for the work these teams do to struggle for the rights of Individuals throughout the nation, I’ve develop into more and more curious as as to whether or not lawmakers could be present in contempt of the Supreme Court docket of the USA for what looks as if brazen defiance to their rulings and directions. There isn’t a rule of regulation if there aren’t any penalties for violating these legal guidelines.
