Supreme Court Affirms Second Amendment Rights to Carry Firearms at Home and Work

2022-06-23 07:00:00

(Washington) In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday morning that the 2nd and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution protect the right to carry a firearm at home and at work. exterior of it.

Updated June 23, 2022

As a result, the Supreme Court invalidated a New York State law dating from 1913 by which it was considered a criminal act to possess a firearm without a license. New York law stated that an individual could obtain such a permit if he or she demonstrated a special need for self-protection.

In addition to New York, the decision has immediate effect in six other states (California, New Jersey, Maryland, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island), all Democratic and where the rights to carry a firearm were restricted. It therefore becomes possible to see individuals appear carrying a weapon on their belt in large cities such as New York, Boston, Chicago or Los Angeles.

In his argument on behalf of the majority of judges, all conservatives, Magistrate Clarence Thomas said: “Nothing in the Second Amendment distinguishes between the home or public places with regard to the carrying of weapons. »

“This decision severely limits the efforts of states to try to limit gun violence,” replied Justice Stephen Breyer on behalf of the three dissenting justices. He deplores that the Court ruled on the question “without considering the potentially fatal consequences of its decision”.

“It’s a major decision. Without question, this is the most important gun decision by the Supreme Court and any US court since Heller. [District de Columbia c. Heller, 2008] », Says Rafael Jacob, researcher in residence at the Raoul-Dandurand Chair in Strategic and Diplomatic Studies at UQAM.

PHOTO ALAIN ROBERGE, LA PRESSE ARCHIVES

Rafael Jacob, researcher in residence at the Raoul-Dandurand Chair in Strategic and Diplomatic Studies at UQAM

At the time, the Supreme Court’s decision, adopted 5-4, recognized the right to possess a firearm inside the home for self-defense. The judgment did not address the issue of wearing one outside the home.

“What was announced this morning [jeudi] is more restricted, but still important, because it grants an additional expansion to the constitutional recognition of the right to bear a weapon, continues Mr. Jacob. But it is more limited in that it involves regulations that do not affect all American states. »

Still possible to regulate

Unsurprisingly, the decision sparked a flood of diametrically opposed reactions in the United States.

“The NRA scores a victory!” “, exclaimed the National Rifle Association on its Twitter account. “The Supreme Court has confirmed that the right to bear arms DOES NOT STOP AT THE DOOR. »

The disappointment was palpable among those in favor of tightening the rules on gun ownership. Starting with President Joe Biden, who said he was “deeply disappointed” in a statement.

This decision contradicts both common sense and the Constitution. We should all be very troubled by this.

Joe Biden, President of the United States

New York State Governor Kathy Hochul called the decision “outrageous,” especially amid “national reckoning” following the shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, in Texas.

PHOTO KEVIN P. COUGHLIN, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

New York State Governor Kathy Hochul at a press conference following the announcement of the Supreme Court’s decision

For his part, the Democratic mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, said he feared that the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence would fuel “a wave of gun violence.”

According to Rafael Jacob, political entities still retain the right to regulate firearms. “The Supreme Court ruled that the laws of the states concerned were too subjective,” he explains. States can continue to regulate the right to carry a weapon in public, but the criteria must be very clear and more objective than those currently existing. »

Senate votes to restrict access to guns

Thursday evening, the US Senate adopted a bipartisan bill by 65 votes to 33 to regulate the sale and possession of firearms without contravening the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. This amendment states that “a well organized militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The bill, which has every chance of being validated in the House of Representatives this Friday, would make it possible to prohibit the sale of weapons to people representing a danger to themselves or others, to encourage more verifications of criminal and psychological histories of buyers aged 18 to 21, to ensure better control over the sale of illegal weapons and to improve programs intended for mental health. The text remains far short of the measures demanded by the country’s president, Joe Biden.

Finally, this decision by the Supreme Court comes as in Canada, Parliament is considering Bill C-21, which aims to prohibit the purchase, sale, transfer and importation of handguns. Ottawa is also considering making participation in the buyback program for assault weapons now banned in the country mandatory.

With Agence France-Presse