US Supreme Court Dismisses New York Case as Moot

In a 6-3 vote today, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) handed a disappointing judgement on the New York handgun restriction and transportation case that was poised to give the Second Amendment a major victory.

Citing that New York amended their law already, the court decided not to rule on the egregious infringement, a ruling that would have put ridiculously overzealous gun control laws in jeopardy nationwide.

The rule, in case you forgot, basically amounted to the fact that a New York resident couldn’t transport a handgun that they already lawfully owned, and complied with all the other bullshit New York puts gun owners through just to buy one, outside city limits. This applied even to another piece of property that they owned. That’s correct, you, oh Big Apple resident, could not transport your handgun to your other house or property if it was outside the city, to say nothing of transporting it literally anywhere else.

This is the state that arrested an actively serving military member for having his issued magazines in his vehicle with him, so I’m not surprised by the absurdity of the rule. I was just looking forward to having new your finally get the constitutional smack on the rear they needed as Illinois and the East Coast watched, desperately clutching their own tender cheeks because they know they’re guilty too.

But SCOTUS has decided not to give us that satisfaction. I’m not surprised, I’m just disappointed. This is a purely political move to not make waves, it’s easier to let this fizzle out with the excuse that NY already corrected the deficiency than to rock the boat and put the gun control heavy states legal teams scrambling like mad at the cataclysm that could befall if SCOTUS ruled heavily against the precept, which they almost certainly would.

That’s what makes this a political move. Justices that sit more in the middle on the issue of Second Amendment freedoms aren’t forced to choose if they dismiss the case. Knowing which way they would have to choose with how heavy handed New York got this was the easy way out of the mess.

By a 6-3 vote, the justices said the case was moot because the law was repealed. But the ruling gave opponents a chance to go back to the lower courts and argue that the city nonetheless imposed new restrictions on gun owners who want to take their weapons outside the city to second homes or to practice at a shooting range.

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by fellow conservatives Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, said the court should have decided the case and declared the restriction unconstitutional.

With the nation on the brink of a truly terrifying financial crisis in many respects, caused by a medical crisis and widely varying opinions on the response, SCOTUS has declined to add this to the firestorm. It may be an overall fairly wise political move… but it is not one in alignment with the Constitution. The Court had the opportunity to declare in a decisive way that the States couldn’t just fetter their citizens rights as “reasonable restrictions” just because they all heart themselves some gun control.

Disappointing… truly disappointing.

Keith Finch
Keith is the former Editor-in-Chief of GAT Marketing Agency, Inc. He got told there was a mountain of other things that needed doing, so he does those now and writes here when he can. A USMC Infantry Veteran and Small Arms and Artillery Technician, Keith covers the evolving training and technology from across the shooting industry. Teaching since 2009, he covers local concealed carry courses, intermediate and advanced rifle courses, handgun, red dot handgun, bullpups, AKs, and home defense courses for civilians, military client requests, and law enforcement client requests.