Opinion: SCOTUS rejection tells anti-gun
states it's OK to ignore Bruen decision

If you haven't yet read Arbalest Quarrel's deep dive into the Supreme Court's failure to take up Antonyuk v. James, do so soon. You'll see just how high the stakes really are. This companion piece isn't meant to replace that. It's here to underscore why the court's refusal to grant certiorari (writ to call up the records of an inferior court) is more than disappointing — it's dangerous.

Let's be blunt. The Supreme Court just told New York — and, by extension, every anti-gun state — that it's OK to ignore the Bruen ruling.

That's what the denial of Antonyuk really means in practice. And if you're someone who values your right to keep and bear arms, especially if you're young and just stepping into your role as a citizen defender of liberty, you ought to be furious.

The Bruen ruling, which should've ended "may-issue" licensing schemes, was clear: The government can't demand "extraordinary need" before you're allowed to defend yourself. But New York didn't care. They cooked up the so-called Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA), which gutted Bruen before the ink was dry. Instead of proper cause, now they just ban carry in nearly every public place. It's like swapping one unconstitutional rule for a thousand mini ones — and the result is the same: disarmament through delay and denial. .....