If you want to read the "text, history, tradition" argument for why New York's restrictive concealed carry law is constitutional under Heller/McDonald, this is the best paper I've seen to that end.
https://twitter.com/MarkFrassetto/status/1456271496901316608
The US made a similar argument at the Court. Concealed carry bans and "good reason" permit schemes date back to reconstruction. They were even relatively common by the 20th century. So, there is more of a historical record to back them up in a text, history, tradition test.
One big problem with the argument is total bans on carry, which is closer to what New York has in practice, were rarer. And many involved carry with the intent to terrorize people. Alito noted this in a North Carolina statute that was brought up.
The concealed carry bans and "good reason" permit schemes also don't date back further than the late 19th century. So, I'm not sure the justices will find that convincing. But, from what I've seen, it's the strongest argument New York has in the case.
It also provides some insight into how a "text, history, tradition" standard of review for gun laws is not going to result in slam-dunk rulings against lots of different restrictions.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
