|
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.
This case is supported by the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. Alan Gura is the plaintiff's attorney.
Court: Federal District Court for Southern New York
Updates:
Kachalsky was decided in favor of the defendants by the District Court, which stated:
First, a plaintiff must “demonstrate that he was treated differently than others similarly situated as a result of intentional or purposeful discrimination.” Id. Second, he must show that “the disparity in treatment cannot survive the appropriate level of scrutiny.” Id. The claim fails, as Section 400.00(2)(f) does not treat similarly situated individuals differently, but rather applies uniformly. Further, all full-carry permit applicants are not similarly situated because some can demonstrate “proper cause” for the issuance of a permit, while others cannot.
|