GOA, SAF Submit Amicus Briefs on Key Supreme Court Case

Two of the nation’s top gun-rights organizations filed amicus briefs this week with the U.S. Supreme Court.

The briefs are in reference to a case known as NYSRPA v Bruen, which is a challenge to New York’s controversial “may-issue” permitting system brought by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and backed by the National Rifle Association.

“This case has been a long time coming and it would not be an overstatement that SAF has an intense interest because of our many members in New York and elsewhere that so-called ‘proper cause’ requirements are routinely used to deny law-abiding citizens the ability to carrying firearms for personal protection outside their homes,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.

“Such laws are arbitrary in nature and they place an absurd level of authority in the hands of local officials and their subordinates to deny citizens their constitutional right to bear arms,” he continued.

BREAKING: Supreme Court Takes First 2A Case in a Decade

Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President for GOA and GOF agreed with Mr. Gottlieb.

“GOA and GOF are proud to ensure a ‘no compromise’ message is presented before the Supreme Court, as this brief strikes at the core of the most egregious gun control in the entire country,” stated Pratt.

“Gun owners nationwide look forward to the Court ruling with the ‘text, history and tradition’ of the Second Amendment and striking down New York’s infringing ‘may-issue’ permit system,” he added.

The notion that a law-abiding citizen needs explicit permission from the government before he or she is allowed to exercise a fundamental right is antithetical to the Constitution. Which raises the question of how did we even get to this point? Why is this even up for debate?

The answer to that question can be found on social media. What one quickly realizes is that many on the Left have deluded themselves over the years into believing that the right to keep and bear arms doesn’t mean what it plainly states. Case in point:

The Court will likely hear this case in the Fall and issue a decision next Spring. If you have time, you can read the two briefs below:

GOA Amicus Brief:

SAF Amicus Brief:

Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE!

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 3 comments… add one }
  • BluNos July 26, 2021, 5:19 pm

    It’s about effing time! Now it is in John Roberts lap. Which will it be Chief Justice: The law as written in the Bill of Rights, or your wishy washy am I conservative or liberal today decision making skills.

  • Phil July 23, 2021, 9:22 am

    What about arbitrary declarations such as the Town ofMelbourne Beach, FL declaring: Cha. 16 (j) “Prohibit or limit the sale, purchase, transfer, distribution, display, possession, or exchange of any weapon; except that this provision shall not apply to duly authorized law enforcement officials acting in an official capacity.” when the mayor declares an “emergency” such as the one during Covid?

  • Mark N. July 21, 2021, 2:10 am

    Certainly it is up for debate. All one needs do is to read the en banc opinion in Young v. Hawaii, a case that concluded (on extraordinarily strained reasoning and misstatements of the law relied upon) that the Second Amendment does not confer ANY right to bear arms outside the home. Of note, Hawaii has only one kind of carry permit that does not distinguish between open and concealed, but an argument that a concealed carry license was a matter of right was eliminated by that Court’s ruling in Peruta, leaving with Young no option but to argue a right to openly carry firearms. One would have thought that by eliminating a right to concealed carry, the Court would be bound to recognize a right to open carry, but the Court managed to rule conclusively to the contrary. (A petition for cert. in Young is pending.)

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend