U.S. Supreme Court sidesteps major gun rights ruling but more cases loom

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a challenge to New York City restrictions on handgun owners transporting their firearms outside the home, meaning the justices, for now, will not be wading into the battle over the scope of the right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment. But there are other cases pending that could give the court's conservative majority a chance to widen gun rights including challenges to assault weapon bans in Massachusetts and Cook County, Illinois, and permit requirements to carry firearms outside the home in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Maryland.

The justices threw out the New York dispute because the measure that was challenged by individual gun owners and the state's National Rifle Association affiliate was rolled back by the city last July, rendering the case moot. The city had asked the Supreme Court not to hear the matter. The justices went ahead and heard arguments on Dec. 2 but ultimately agreed with the city. The case was sent back to lower courts to determine whether the gun owners may seek damages or press claims that the amended law still infringes their rights. Justice Samuel Alito, in a dissent joined by fellow conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, said the case was not moot and that the city's law violated the Second Amendment.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, while agreeing that the current dispute is moot, said in a concurring opinion that the court "should address that issue soon." President Donald Trump's administration had supported the NRA and gun owners in the New York case. The powerful lobby group is closely aligned with U.S. conservatives and Republicans including Trump.

Gun control proponents had feared that the justices would use the case to expand gun rights by either extending the right to possess firearms for self-defense beyond the home or by creating a strict standard that would force lower courts to cast a skeptical eye on new or existing gun control laws. Such a ruling could have threatened a wide array of gun control measures nationwide such as expanded background checks for gun buyers and "red flag" laws targeting the firearms of people deemed dangerous by the courts, according to these advocates.

The case focused on New York City's handgun "premises" licenses that allowed holders to transport their firearms only to a handful of shooting ranges within the city and to hunting areas elsewhere in the state during designated hunting seasons. The city's ordinance was amended last year to remove the restrictions challenged in the case. The issue of gun rights is contentious in the United States, which has experienced a succession of mass shootings in recent decades that have prompted calls from many Americans for stricter regulation of firearms and ammunition. But, citing the Second Amendment, the NRA and gun rights advocates have consistently resisted most firearms control measures.

The Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the regulation advanced the city's interest in protecting public safety and did not violate the Second Amendment. The plaintiffs - local handgun owners and the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association - appealed to the Supreme Court. The high court's last major gun rulings came in 2008 and 2010 when it recognized for the first time that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to keep a gun at home for self-defense and then extended that decision to the states.