More Californians could carry concealed guns if Supreme Court strikes down New York law

More Californians could be allowed to carry concealed weapons if the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down a New York law under challenged from Second Amendment advocates.

The nine justices on Wednesday heard arguments against a New York law that requires gun owners to obtain a special license from local authorities to carry firearms outside the home and show “proper cause” to get one, according to The Washington Post. Seven other states have similar laws: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

Two New York gun owners are challenging the state law. Robert Nash and Brandon Koch were denied concealed carry permits because they could not show a special need for self-protection. The petitioners argue such restrictions are a violation of their Second Amendment rights.

Similar to New York, California county sheriffs have jurisdiction over who gets a concealed carry permit, and rural counties tend to issue them more frequently than urban areas, said Adam Winkler, a professor at UCLA’s School of Law and a specialist in American constitutional law, the Supreme Court, and gun policy.

The court has until the end of its session, in June, to issue a ruling, but Winkler and other gun laws experts say California can expect to see its concealed carry law struck down if the Supreme Court rules against New York.

“If the Supreme Court thinks New York’s law is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court thinks California’s law is unconstitutional too,” Winkler said. “So it’s only a matter of time.”

California concealed carry permits

In California, concealed carry applicants must make the case for why they have a need to carry a firearm, Winkler said. Sheriffs look for factors that make the applicant particularly susceptible to crime.

“Merely stating that you’re fearful of crime is not generally a good reason,” Winkler said. “But you may be able to make a stronger argument if you can show that you, say, work in a dangerous area, are a victim of stalking or someone has threatened your life.”

The number of concealed carry permits varies from county to county. Los Angeles, with a population of more than 10 million people, only has about 400 private citizens with such permits, Winkler said.

A spokesman for the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office couldn’t immediately answer how many concealed carry permits have been issued to Sacramento County residents, but a 2017 state audit found 9,130 active concealed carry licenses in a county with a population of about 1.5 million people.

Guns and violent crime

Respondents in the Supreme Court case argue that there is a compelling reason for restricting the right to bear arms: it reduces violent crime.

John Donohue, the C. Wendell and Edith M. Carlsmith Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, was one of 14 social scientists who signed a letter to the court arguing that states with “right-to-carry” laws are associated with an increase in violent crime.

“Typically, when one justifies a law or restriction that infringes on a potential constitutional right, the court will say something like, ‘well, this can only be sustained if it serves some compelling governmental interest,’” Donohue told The Sacramento Bee. “And of course, here there is a very compelling governmental interest, which is we don’t want more crime than we need.”

Petitioners, however, pointed to a different letter filed by William English, a political economist and assistant professor at the McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University.

English, in his amicus curiae, said right-to-carry laws and associated growth in carry permits have “no statistically significant effect on murder rates, firearm murder rates, non-firearm murder rates, or overall violent crime rates.”

Donohue disagreed, saying English’s studies are unpublished and “badly flawed.” For example, in Illinois, Donohue’s research shows that crime increased after a circuit court judge struck down a similar restriction on gun-carrying.

California gun laws

California’s reputation as a gun control state is well-earned. State lawmakers have passed numerous restrictions on firearms over the years, including a ban on assault weapons and another ban on high-capacity firearm magazines.

However, in recent years a federal judge in Southern California has challenged its laws.

Judge Roger Benitez, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, issued decisions that overturned the state’s bans on large capacity gun magazines and assault rifles and issuing an injunction against the state’s ammunition background check law.

In doing so, Benitez offered fiery rhetoric, likening assault rifles to a Swiss Army knife that is “good for both home and battle.”

Thus far, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has had a mixed record on handling Benitez’s rulings. The appeals court upheld his decision to strike down the state’s large capacity gun magazine ban, but blocked his decision to strike down the ban on assault weapons.

If the Supreme Court decides against New York, it could put California’s strict gun laws on a slippery slope to repeal, experts say.

Several of the Supreme Court justices suggested that the Second Amendment is being treated like a second-class right, Winkler said.

“What that means, presumably, is that those justices believe too many gun control laws are being upheld by the courts, and that it’s time to start striking more laws down,” he said.

This story was originally published November 4, 2021 at 5:00 AM with the headline "More Californians could carry concealed guns if Supreme Court strikes down New York law."