Connect with us

Northeast

New York gun control regime handed defeat in court

Published

on

New York gun control regime handed defeat in court

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

Second Amendment activists scored another win against New York State’s expansive gun control regime on Thursday.

A federal judge said a newly enacted state law that bans licensed firearms owners from carrying concealed weapons on all private property, unless the owners permit weapons with a sign or by express consent, violates the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Advertisement

“At least as to private property open to the public (the subject of this motion), New York’s restriction is unconstitutional,” wrote U.S. District Court John Sinatra, Jr., a Trump appointee. 

“Regulation in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the new enactment is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations,” the judge wrote, citing recent Supreme Court precedent. “New York fails that test here.” 

GOP LAWMAKER UNVEILS EFFORT TO BAN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FROM USING IDS TO BUY GUNS

A man fires his pistol at an indoor shooting range during a qualification course to renew his Carry Concealed handgun permit at the Placer Sporting Club in Roseville, Calif.  (AP)

The judge also denied a motion from New York for a two-week stay in the ruling while the state Attorney General’s office filed an appeal, reasoning that the state is unlikely to succeed on the merits. 

Advertisement

Sinatra said that property owners have a right to exclude legal gun owners from carrying firearms on their property. “But the state may not unilaterally exercise that right and, thereby, interfere with the long-established Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to carry for self-defense on private property open to the public.” 

The Concealed Carry Improvement Act, signed by Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul in July 2022, was passed in response to a Supreme Court ruling that declared the state’s previous concealed carry permitting requirements unconstitutional. Last December, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit blocked several provisions of the law from taking effect, though it upheld a controversial requirement that concealed carry permit applicants demonstrate good moral character and disclose household and family members on a permit application.

The appellate court also let stand a ban on concealed carry in so-called “sensitive places,” including theaters, bars, public parks and other spaces.

TRUMP TO HEADLINE NRA EVENT IN PIVOTAL SWING STATE TWO WEEKS BEFORE ELECTION DAY

Hochul signed the Concealed Carry Improvement Act, which restricted where licensed firearms owners may carry concealed weapons.  (Getty Images)

Advertisement

Gun rights activists praised Sinatra’s decision. “This is yet another important victory for Second Amendment rights and another major loss for New York, authoritarian governments, and radical anti-rights organizations like Everytown and Giffords,” said Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition. 

“We will continue to fight forward as we work to restore the full scope of the right to keep and bear arms throughout the United States. Hopefully Kathy Hochul is ready to write another check for legal fees,” he added. 

The New York Attorney General’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Earlier this week, Hochul celebrated her administration’s gun control policies, announcing that gun violence in New York State has declined 47 percent since she took office in 2021. 

GUN RIGHTS GROUP APPLAUDS AFTER FEDERAL APPEALS COURT DEALS BLOW TO NY CONCEALED CARRY LAW

Advertisement

A federal judge ruled New York’s ban on licensed firearms owners carrying concealed weapons on all private property was unconstitutional.  (spxChrome)

“And you all know what happened when the Supreme Court overturned the laws against concealed carry weapons, stripping away the power of the governor of this state to make her citizens safe. When the Supreme Court did that, we didn’t throw up our hands and surrender. We fought back,” Hochul said. 

“We doubled down. We came up with legislation. And we have a prohibition on concealed carry weapons in sensitive places. I personally think every place is sensitive, don’t you? Alright, well, we drew the lines, okay? We decided what was sensitive, and so far we are good.”

However, gun rights groups argue that Sinatra’s decision shows Hochul is wrong.

Advertisement

“As we’ve said all along, the ‘sensitive place’ carry restrictions imposed by New York post-Bruen are unconstitutional. Hard stop,” said Bill Sack, director of Legal Operations for the Second Amendment Foundation. “We are thrilled that once again, the courts have agreed, and sent this amoral and unlawful ban packing.”

Read the full article from Here

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Boston, MA

Jazzy Francik tosses no-hitter as FSU softball run-rules Boston College

Published

on

Jazzy Francik tosses no-hitter as FSU softball run-rules Boston College


play

  • Florida State sophomore Jazzy Francik pitched her third career no-hitter against Boston College.
  • The Seminoles defeated the Eagles 10-0 in six innings due to the run-rule.
  • The victory moves Florida State one win away from clinching the ACC regular-season title.

Jazzy Francik returned to the site of one of the toughest outings of her career and delivered a dominant performance.

The Florida State sophomore tossed her third career no-hitter and powered the Seminoles to a 10-0 win over Boston College in six innings Saturday at Harrington Athletics Village, moving FSU within one win of clinching the ACC regular-season title.

Advertisement

Francik (19-2) was in control from the first pitch, striking out six and allowing only one baserunner on an infield error in the fifth inning. She needed just 67 pitches to complete the no-hitter, the third of her career and one of the most efficient outings of her season.

Florida State’s offense gave its ace plenty of support, collecting 12 hits and scoring 10 runs. After a scoreless first inning, the Seminoles broke through in the second with three runs on RBI doubles by freshmen Haley Griggs and Makenna Sturgis.

FSU added four more runs in the fourth inning behind a two-run double from Jaysoni Beachum and an RBI single by Ashtyn Danley. The Seminoles put the run-rule into play in the sixth, scoring three times on an RBI single from Sturgis, an RBI double by Isa Torres and a sacrifice fly from Danley.

Beachum, Torres, Sturgis and Danley each drove in two runs as Florida State continued to pressure Boston College despite several highlight-reel defensive plays from the Eagles.

Advertisement

Francik and the Seminole defense sealed the no-hitter in the bottom of the sixth to end the game early.

Florida State is one win away from securing at least a share of the ACC regular-season championship. A sweep of Boston College on Sunday would clinch the title outright.

How to watch FSU vs. Boston College Game 2

  • Date: Saturday, May 2
  • Time: 4 p.m.
  • Where: Harrington Athletics Village, Brighton, Massachusetts
  • TV/Stream: ACC extra

Peter Holland Jr. covers Florida State athletics and Big Bend Preps for the Tallahassee Democrat. If you like to pitch a story on a high school athlete, don’t hesitate to get in touch with him via email at PHolland@Gannett.com or on X @_Da_pistol.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Pittsburg, PA

Pittsburgh residents raise concerns over site of proposed reentry center

Published

on

Pittsburgh residents raise concerns over site of proposed reentry center


Outrage is building in a quiet Pittsburgh neighborhood.

Residents say they were blindsided by a plan to convert the former Fraternal Order of Police lodge on Banksville Road into a reentry center. The building could be turned into housing for up to 100 federal inmates, officials said.

Dismas Charities, an organization that operates federal halfway houses across the country, is behind the proposal. But neighbors say this isn’t the place.

“What will these people be doing when they’re not in the halfway house? Will they be law-abiding citizens and respect our community and its members?” questioned Judi Perry, a Shady Crest resident.

Advertisement

Concerns range from safety to proximity. Some fear the risk of repeat offenses, even though the facility is designed for rehabilitation. Residents point to past incidents tied to similar programs, including a case in Kentucky where an inmate left a facility and killed a police officer.

“We need to be better educated about how this facility would operate, what the parameters are for the people who stay there, and maybe, if we had more information, it would comfort us,” Perry said.

Inside a recent Pittsburgh Planning Commission presentation, Dismas Charities pitched the facility as a second-chance model.

“Over the past five years, we’ve had almost 40,000 residents participate in our programs nationally, and the rate of recidivism is .08 percent,” a Dismas Charities representative said at the meeting.

But that message isn’t landing here. Petitions are already circulating with hundreds of signatures collected. Neighbors say this fight is just beginning.

Advertisement

“We have preconceived notions about these people who were convicted and committed a crime. We don’t know what their crime was, and so maybe our concerns are exaggerated. But in general, you don’t like the idea of that facility being so close to our community,” Perry said.

A decision could come soon, as the commission is set to take this up in the coming days. If approved, it would still need additional sign-off before any inmates move in.



Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

Telework at DCF under fire following Child Advocate letter

Published

on

Telework at DCF under fire following Child Advocate letter


A strongly worded memo raised new questions about how much work Department of Children and Families (DCF) staff were doing from home, and whether that level of teleworking was hurting child protection. 

Telework expanded during the pandemic and later became part of the state’s labor agreement, allowing some DCF employees to work remotely up to 80% of the week.

While social workers continued to handle court appearances, home visits, and foster placements in person, they were allowed to start and end most workdays at home. Staff must reapply for telework permission every six months and face losing that privilege if performance slips. 

Concerns over the workflow quickly followed. The state’s Office of the Child Advocate (OCA) warned that extensive teleworking could be undermining case practice and supervision inside an agency already struggling with high turnover and many inexperienced workers.

Advertisement

In a critical letter sent Thursday, the Child Advocate suggested that telework should be limited unless workers met specific, data‑driven performance standards, citing the loss of in‑office collaboration, supervision, and real‑time support. 

NBC Connecticut Investigates also spoke exclusively with a longtime former DCF employee who remained in the child welfare field. That former worker said telework simply did not function on multiple levels at DCF, describing widespread belief among current staff and those in the judicial system that bringing people back into the office was a necessary step toward restoring the agency. 

Lawmakers from both parties echoed those concerns. House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora (R) said staff working remotely were missing daily interaction, training, and support, instead operating in silos. House Speaker Matt Ritter(D) said the newly formed oversight committee was expected to examine the policy. 

Those warnings were backed up by troubling findings. According to the OCA’s report, a review of in‑home cases in 2024 and 2025 found face‑to‑face interactions did not happen in about 40% of cases—something the OCA called alarming and in need of urgent attention. 

Advertisement

As scrutiny over DCF intensified, teleworking became the latest flashpoint in a broader debate over accountability, supervision, and whether the systems meant to protect vulnerable children were being stretched too thin.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending