Christian v James
The Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) decision in Bruen established that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense. Bruen also set a standard that gun laws must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
In response, New York State under Governor Kathy Hochul enacted the misnamed Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA), which was an attempt to work around the Bruen ruling. CCIA expanded the list of “sensitive places” in NY State where guns are banned to include public parks, libraries, and private property opened to the public unless posted otherwise by the property owner. Places in NY State where firearms could be carried became an exception, not a constitutionally protected right.
A lawsuit called Christian v. James is fighting the ‘sensitive place’ tactic. The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) joined individual plaintiff Brett Christian and the Second Amendment Foundation to file this lawsuit against these new restrictions.
Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for:
10 AM on Wednesday June 25, 2025
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse
17th Floor, Room 1703
40 Foley Square
New York, NY 10007
DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON CHIEF JUDGE Docket #: 25-384
The case boils down to the fact that New York’s sweeping bans are government overreach of the type that the Second Amendment was designed to prevent. States cannot invent new categories of “sensitive places” to justify gun bans, especially when these restrictions lack clear historical precedent.
Labelling most of a state as a ‘sensitive place’ where firearms have been banned has become a favorite tactic of heavily democrat states like NY, Illinois, California, etc. The outcome of Christian v. James could have significant implications for those states using ‘sensitive places’ as a gun control tactic.
A positive decision by the 2nd Circuit will only directly impact NY State but it may have influence on other lawsuits, as Christian is one of many similar cases across the USA.
Ultimately, many legal experts expect the Supreme Court will have to take on these cases.
