Right to Carry / Discretionary Licensing
|
Firearms licensing typically fall into one of two categories: "Shall Issue" or "May Issue". Most states do not regulate the ownership and possession of handguns other than their loaded and/or concealed carry. Right-to-carry states have adopted "Shall Issue" licensing practices where a permit can only be denied if an individual qualifies as a prohibited person under state of federal law. "May Issue" states empower a government official, frequently a member of law enforcement or the judiciary, to a make an individual decision on each applicant's 'suitability' to carry firearms using vague standards such as 'proper purpose' or 'good moral character'.
A small number of states such as Massachusetts and New York make the ownership and possession of handguns, even inside the home, contingent upon this type of subjective judgment by a government official. In virtually every instance where an official is responsible for subjectively determining who may and who may not carry or own a firearm there exists a pattern of unfairness and unequal treatment.
|
|
Hightower v. City of Boston is the first case brought in federal court that directly challenges a police chief's arbitrary authority to deny someone a license to possess a handgun and the fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Muller v. Maenza challenges facially invalid New Jersey handgun licensing statutes that vest total discretion for the approval and issuance of handgun licenses in the hands of police chiefs and judges and require that an individual demonstrate a "justifiable need" before being issued a license.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Woollard v. Sheridan (MD) |
|
Woollard v. Sheridan alleges that the defendants force handgun carry license applicants to prove a need to exercise their fundamental Second Amendment rights under arbitrary standards.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Kachalsky v. Cacace challenges the New York state requirement that handgun carry permit applicants demonstrate a heightened need for self-defense in order to exercise the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
D'Cruz v. McCraw is a Federal Second Amendment challenge to a Texas law that prevents a certain class of law-abiding citizens from exercising the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
|