Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that New York State's Concealed Carry Improvement Act is unconstitutional.

IV 118TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION H. RES. 45 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act is unconstitutional. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JANUARY 17, 2023 Ms. TENNEY (for herself, Ms. STEFANIK, Mr. LANGWORTHY, and Mr. ISSA) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary RESOLUTION Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act is unconstitutional. Whereas the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees the right of Americans to keep and bear arms; Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in McDonald v. City of Chicago that ‘‘the right to keep and bear arms [is] among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty’’; Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in NYSRPA v. Bruen that New York State’s Sullivan law is unconstitutional and the Second Amendment cannot be subject to a balancing test; VerDate Sep 11 2014 22:54 Jan 17, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR45.IH HR45 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 2 •HRES 45 IH Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Second Amendment does not distinguish between the right to keep and bear arms in one’s home and in public; Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States in District of Columbia v. Heller ruled that the Government cannot declare somewhere a ‘‘sensitive place’’ simply because it is crowded and generally protected by the police; Whereas New York State has passed the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) to unconstitutionally restrict the ability to keep and bear arms; Whereas the CCIA abuses the ability of the State to declare certain locations as ‘‘sensitive places’’ where concealed carry is not permitted; Whereas the CCIA declares ‘‘Times Square’’, all demonstra- tions and gatherings, and public sidewalks during ‘‘spe- cial event[s]’’ to be ‘‘sensitive places’’, contradicting the precedent of the Supreme Court of the United States; Whereas the CCIA violates private property rights by auto- matically declaring all private property to be a ‘‘sensitive place’’; Whereas the CCIA requires concealed carry license applicants to provide 3 years of social media posts to licensing offi- cers to review their ‘‘character and conduct’’; Whereas this social media review uses overly broad language that could violate concealed carry license applicants’ First and Fourth Amendment rights and be used to target in- dividuals based on their political opinions; Whereas the CCIA fails to comply with the doctrine of NYSRPA v. Bruen that gun laws must be rooted in the ‘‘history, text, and tradition’’ of the country; VerDate Sep 11 2014 22:54 Jan 17, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR45.IH HR45 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 3 •HRES 45 IH Whereas Judge Glenn Suddaby, a judge for the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, ruled in Antonyuk v. Bruen that the key provisions of the CCIA are unconstitutional; Whereas plaintiffs in Antonyuk v. Bruen and in Antonyuk v. Nigrelli found that to feign compliance with the NYSRPA v. Bruen ruling, New York State used laws that demonstrate an invidiously discriminatory animus towards religion, national origin, and race, including slave codes, as historical analogues; Whereas Judge Glenn Suddaby also granted a Temporary Restraining Order in the subsequent case Antonyuk v. Nigrelli to protect New Yorkers from a wide swath of the State’s unconstitutionally enacted Second Amendment in- fringement; and Whereas there have now been multiple New Yorkers suing the State of New York over the CCIA to protect their constitutional rights: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep- 1 resentatives that— 2 (1) New York State’s Concealed Carry Improve- 3 ment Act violates the rights of New Yorkers under 4 the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the 5 United States and is unconstitutional; 6 (2) the courts should immediately strike down 7 the Concealed Carry Improvement Act as unconsti- 8 tutional; and 9 VerDate Sep 11 2014 22:54 Jan 17, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR45.IH HR45 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB 4 •HRES 45 IH (3) all States should pass legislation supporting 1 Second Amendment rights instead of trying to re- 2 strict or undermine Americans’ constitutional rights. 3 Æ VerDate Sep 11 2014 22:54 Jan 17, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6301 E:\BILLS\HR45.IH HR45 pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB