SAF sues Westchester County, NY to block "good cause" requirement for CCW

mikec said:

The state will crap when that language gets tossed. So will many other states.

One cool thing about a NY permit, I never saw a business that had a no CCW sign when I lived up there and had my permit.

Click to expand...

gprimr1 said:

Ladies and Gentleman; this is the MAIN EVENT.

This ruling will have a direct and profound impact on Maryland orders of magnitude greater than anything to date.

Click to expand...

STATEMENT OF FACTS
9. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: “A well
regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”
10. The Second Amendment guarantees individuals a fundamental right to carry functional handguns in non-sensitive public places for purposes of self-defense.
11. The States and their units of local government are bound to respect Second Amendment rights by operation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
12. The States retain the ability to regulate the manner of carrying handguns, prohibit the carrying of handguns in specific, narrowly defined sensitive places, prohibit the carrying of arms that are not within the scope of Second Amendment protection, and disqualify specific, particularly dangerous individuals from carrying handguns.
13. The States may not completely ban the carrying of handguns for self-defense, deny individuals the right to carry handguns in non-sensitive places, deprive individuals of the right to carry handguns in an arbitrary and capricious manner, or impose regulations on the right to carry handguns that are inconsistent with the Second Amendment.

.....

18. Plaintiffs Alan Kachalsky, Christina Nikolov, and the members and supporters of plaintiff SAF, would carry functional handguns in public for self-defense, but refrain from doing so because they fear arrest, prosecution, fine, and imprisonment for lack of a license to carry a handgun.
19. Plaintiffs Alan Kachalsky and Christina Nikolov are fully qualified to obtain a license to carry a handgun under New York Penal Code § 400.00(1), in that each (a) is over 21 years old, (b) of good moral character, (c) has never been convicted of a felony or serious crime, (d) has never been mentally ill or confined to any institution, (e) has not had a license revoked or been the subject of a family court order, (f) has completed a firearms safety course, and (g) should not be denied a permit for any good cause.
20. Defendants maintain a strict policy of denying handgun carry license applications where the applicants cannot affirmatively demonstrate a unique and personal need for self-defense distinguishable from that of the general public. Plaintiffs Kachalsky and Nikolov, and the members and supporters of plaintiff SAF, cannot meet this standard as it is applied by the defendants.
21. Plaintiff Alan Kachalsky applied for a handgun carry license pursuant to New York Penal Code § 400.00. Defendant Westchester County recommended that the permit be denied. On or about October 8, 2008, Defendant Cacace denied Kachalsky’s permit application, offering that Kachalsky “has not stated any facts which would demonstrate a need for self protection distinguishable from that of the general public.” Accordingly, Defendant Cacace found Kachalsky did not satisfy the requirement of New York Penal Code § 400.00(2)(f) that “proper cause” be shown for issuance of the permit.
22. Plaintiff Kachalsky appealed the permit denial to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, pursuant to Article 78 of the New York Code of Civil Practice Law and Rules. On September 8, 2009, the Appellate Division held that Defendant Cacace’s “determination was not arbitrary or capricious and should not be disturbed.”
23. On February 16, 2010, the New York Court of Appeals dismissed Kachalsky’s appeal on the grounds that it presented no substantial constitutional question. At the time of this decision, it was not a holding of any federal appellate circuit that the States were bound to respect Second Amendment rights. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had held that the Second Amendment did not apply to the States. On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment does incorporate and apply the Second Amendment against the States.

...
COUNT 1
27 Individuals cannot be required to prove their “good cause” for the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights, including the right to keep and bear arms.
28. Individuals cannot be required to demonstrate any unique, heightened need for self-defense apart from the general public in order to exercise the right to keep and bear arms.
29. New York Penal Code § 400.00(2)(f)’s requirement that handgun carry permit applicants demonstrate good cause for the issuance of a permit, violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, facially and as applied against Kachalsky, Nikolov and SAF’s members and supporters, damaging them in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to permanent injunctive relief against the enforcement of this provision.

COUNT II
U.S. CONST., AMEND. XIV, EQUAL PROTECTION, 42 U.S.C. § 1983
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
30. Paragraphs 1 through 29 are incorporated as though fully stated herein.
31 New York Penal Code § 400.00(2)(f)’s requirement that handgun carry permit applicants demonstrate cause for the issuance of a permit violates Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the law, damaging them in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to permanent injunctive relief against the enforcement of this provision.

...

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that judgment be entered in their favor and against Defendants as follows:
1. An order permanently enjoining defendants, their officers, agents, servants,
employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction, from enforcing N.Y. Penal Code § 400.00(2)(f)’s good cause requirement;
...

Click to expand...

krucam said:

Gura for President?

Click to expand...

joppaj said:

Attorney General

Click to expand...

gprimr1 said:

Ladies and Gentleman; this is the MAIN EVENT.

This ruling will have a direct and profound impact on Maryland orders of magnitude greater than anything to date.

Click to expand...

Patrick said:

It's a big deal, but technically the NC case is potentially more important to us because a ruling in that case applies everywhere in the 4th Circuit, and that would be us.

NY would be a huge philosophical win, as MD politicos identify more with the NE than the South.

So far that opens fights in the 9th (CA), 4th (NC) and 2nd (NY). That pretty much covers most of the states that selectively deny our rights. WI is with IL in the 7th, and I would not be surprised to see something filed there soon.

gprimr1: I think that the 7th would close loop on every state that is not "Shall Issue", right? I am too lazy to look at a map right now -- got a 2yr old in my lap helping me type.

Click to expand...

gprimr1 said:

Ladies and Gentleman; this is the MAIN EVENT.

This ruling will have a direct and profound impact on Maryland orders of magnitude greater than anything to date.

Click to expand...

Papi4baby said:

Why NY and not us? Ours us worse than NY. I mean I am happy because I believe this will give us shall issue, but the way this state moves I am not too confident.

Click to expand...

Abacab said:

The NC case has nothing to do with CCW. The New York case is vastly more important.

Click to expand...

Abacab said:

The NC case has nothing to do with CCW. The New York case is vastly more important.

Click to expand...

Papi4baby said:

Why NY and not us? Ours us worse than NY. I mean I am happy because I believe this will give us shall issue, but the way this state moves I am not too confident.

Click to expand...

Papi4baby said:

Why NY and not us? Ours us worse than NY. I mean I am happy because I believe this will give us shall issue, but the way this state moves I am not too confident.

Click to expand...