Harris Claims SCOTUS Decision in NY Gun Case 'Defies' the Constitution


The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down New York’s restrictive handgun law is drawing some interesting takes.

Vice President Kamala Harris reacted to the Supreme Court’s decision in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen case.

Shortly after the ruling was announced, Harris said, “We, the president, myself, many of us are deeply concerned and troubled by the Supreme Court’s ruling today.”

“It, I believe, defies common sense, and the Constitution of the United States,” she added.

Watch the video below:

Priceless Torah Stolen in Las Vegas Expo Heist, Massive Reward Posted

The irony of Harris claiming a decision to protect rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment defies the Constitution, while holding an event to discuss ways to protect access to abortion which is explicitly not in the Constitution, is quite special.

But before you think that was some misspeak, President Joe Biden said the same thing.

“I am deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Since 1911, the State of New York has required individuals who would like to carry a concealed weapon in public to show a need to do so for the purpose of self-defense and to acquire a license,” the president said in a statement.

Do you think the decision defies the Constitution?

He added, “More than a century later, the United States Supreme Court has chosen to strike down New York’s long-established authority to protect its citizens. This ruling contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all.”

Biden also said, “For centuries, states have regulated who may purchase or possess weapons, the types of weapons they may use, and the places they may carry those weapons. And the courts have upheld these regulations.”

It’s not really clear what in this decision would run contrary to those points. The decision notes that other states have permitting requirements to be able to carry concealed outside of the house.

However, it points out the other states are “‘shall issue’ jurisdictions, where authorities must issue concealed-carry licenses whenever applicants satisfy certain threshold requirements, without granting licensing officials discretion to deny licenses based on a perceived lack of need or suitability.”

Justice Thomas Announced a 2034 'Retirement' but Has Big Plans for Biden and Liberals First

In New York, the law requires residents to prove that they are of “good moral character,” and do not have a mental illness or criminal history to be able to carry a gun. And to carry a firearm outside their home, it required them to show “proper cause.”

The issue comes down to the “proper cause” section of the law, which requires residents to show why they need the ability to carry concealed outside of their home, not requiring permits to carry a firearm, or prohibiting firearms in certain “sensitive places.”

As the Supreme Court’s decision states, “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works.”

Biden and Harris’ claim that this decision defies or contradicts the Constitution is bizarre as the Supreme Court is the arbiter of what is or is not Constitutional, therefore the decision can’t defy the Constitution as it is written.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, ,
Comment Down Below