Another New York gun control law has been struck down in federal court, this time surrounding the right to carry a firearm on property owned by private business owners.
Judge John Sinatra from New York's Western District ruled in favor of private citizen Brett Christian, declaring that, although property owners have the right to exclude, "the state may not unilaterally exercise that right.
"In sum, the vast majority of land in New York is held privately. ... These are places that people exercising their rights, frequent every day when they move around outside their homes. The exclusion here makes all of these places presumptively off limits, backed up by the threat of prison," Sinatra wrote in the court's 27-page decision.
"The Nation's historical traditions have not countenanced such an incursion into the right to keep and bear arms across all varieties of private property spread across the land. The right to self-defense is no less important and no less recognized on private property," added Sinatra.
Second Amendment Foundation Executive Director Adam Kraut commended the ruling on Tuesday afternoon, characterizing it as a definitive "win for the public," with Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb parroting him.
"New York's efforts to dance around the Supreme Court's Bruen decision have become a painful exercise in legal acrobatics, which it seems obvious the courts can see through," Gottlieb stated. "This case illustrates the ridiculous lengths to which lawmakers in Albany have tried to go in their efforts to get around the letter and spirit of the high court ruling."
The decision follows a series of losses for New York Gov. Kathy Hochul's cabinet and the state Democratic Party in pushing new gun measures. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that New York's "proper cause" requirement to obtain a firearm was unconstitutional.
"This definition of 'bear' naturally encompasses public carry," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote then. "Most gun owners do not wear a holstered pistol at their hip in their bedroom or while sitting at the dinner table.
"Because these licensing regimes do not require applicants to show an atypical need for armed self-defense, they do not necessarily prevent 'law-abiding, responsible citizens' from exercising their Second Amendment right to public carry," Justice Thomas added.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.