Opinion | How the Supreme Court Could Bring More Guns to New York City

Much of this success results from policies that would most likely be in jeopardy should the Rifle and Pistol Association case go against New York — for instance, restrictions on where people can carry guns and prohibitions on tourists’ bringing weapons into the city. Perhaps most important, regulation[1]s governing how people carry guns in New York City differ from those applied in parts of the state that have long and respected traditions of firearm ownership, such as in upstate New York.At stake in cases like Rifle and Pistol is the possible nationalization of disastrous policies from pro-gun states — not just loosened gun laws but also pre-emptions of how state or local governments can decide what works best. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiffs in any one of these types of cases, the decision could signal that more significant gun control laws might not withstand legal challenges. Additionally, the justices could expand Second Amendment protections beyond the home, an issue left open in previous[2] Supreme Court decisions, and could open the door to overturning longstanding laws governing concealed-carry, gun permitting and other restrictions enacted at the local and state levels.The current composition of the court suggests we should brace for decisions that upend local and state regulations in favor of nationally mandated policies that make it ever easier for people to purchase and carry guns. The nomination of President Trump’s first court appointee, Neil Gorsuch, was buoyed by a $1 million[3] ad campaign by the National Rifle Association.[4] And his second appointee, Brett Kavanaugh, wrote a 2011 circuit court dissent[5] in which he argued that Washington, D.C., could not ban semiautomatic rifles on its streets because the right to bear arms superseded its interest in public safety.Missouri, Tennessee and Washington are not New York City. People

Read more from our friends at the NRA...