During the framing of the Bill of Rights, one colonial delegation suggested that what we now know as the Second Amendment ought to read, "Congress shall never disarm any citizen." Now, the state of New York is hoping to disarm its citizens in houses of worship.
Last June, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. The case stemmed from a New York law that placed most of the state of New York off limits to anyone who would carry a concealed firearm. Under New York law, only those who managed to prove to New York officials that they were of "good moral character" were permitted to lawfully bear arms within their own home. To carry a firearm outside the home, a New York resident had to prove to an official "licensing officer" that he possessed "proper cause." So much for the Second Amendment.
As the term ended, the Justices explained that rights enshrined in our Constitution are meant to be exercised by citizens without demonstrating "some special need" to a government official. Importantly, Justice Clarence Thomas' opinion for the Court noted that what is true for the Second Amendment is no less true for "unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion" as protected by the First Amendment.
New York appears to disagree on both counts. Rather than yield to either the Constitution or the holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court, it responded by passing a new law—the Concealed Carry Improvement Act—making it a crime to carry a weapon in certain "sensitive locations." Just what constitutes a "sensitive location" is left vague, but the state offers a lengthy list of examples, like schools, government buildings, polling places, and even Times Square.
Most remarkably, while New York gave most private property owners the right to permit (or forbid) the carrying of a firearm on their property, it did not extend the same courtesy to its houses of worship. New York made every one of its churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples gun-free zones.
Thus, in addition to once again offending the Second Amendment, New York put the First Amendment squarely in its focus as well. If this sounds familiar, it should.
Just three years ago, while COVID-19 ravaged New York, then-governor Andrew Cuomo restricted houses of worship to grant entry to just 10 persons. Not even Jesus and the 12 Disciples would've been allowed under Governor Cuomo's overly restrictive command. Even so, New York permitted "essential" businesses—acupuncture facilities, campgrounds, garages, etc.—to admit as many as they pleased.
In Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, the U.S. Supreme Court put an end to this obvious double standard. The Court reminded government officials that subjecting houses of worship to harsher regulations than secular businesses violates the Constitution.
To treat that First Amendment right as disposable amid a pandemic is as detrimental to our freedom as treating it as disposable in responding to threats of firearm violence. Allowing the local shopping mall or big box store to choose whether or not to admit individuals exercising their Second Amendment rights, but deny that same freedom to houses of worship, is wrong.
For now, a federal district court in New York has enjoined the law, but New York will not concede. Rather, it chose to appeal, continuing to claim the right to be the sole arbiter of who may lawfully carry a firearm and where. Forcing a church or synagogue—many of which have been subjected to violence—to disarm is wrong. Denying a house of worship the rights and privileges of the First Amendment by denying it access to the Second Amendment is equally unjust.
No American should be forced to sacrifice one constitutionally protected freedom to enjoy another. Houses of worship have a constitutionally protected freedom to decide for themselves whether to allow otherwise legally possessed firearms into their facilities.
Singling out houses of worship for total disarmament demonstrates hostility toward religion, leaves religious adherents defenseless to rebuff violent attacks, and defies at least two recent Supreme Court rulings. Religious leaders are no less qualified than secular business owners to determine whether to allow carrying a firearm for self defense. New York should end its defiant assault on First and Second Amendment freedoms.
George Washington once said, "A free people ought...to be armed." New York not only seems to disagree with President Washington, it appears intent on disarming those who sit in the pews at a time when violence against people of faith is only increasing.
Jeremy Dys is Senior Counsel for First Liberty Institute, a nonprofit law firm dedicated to defending religious freedom for all. Learn more at FirstLiberty.org.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
About the writer
To read how Newsweek uses AI as a newsroom tool, Click here.
