The Supreme Court will soon consider whether to accept New York State Rifle & Pistol Association vs. Cortlett, which challenges New York’s carry laws. One of the legal briefs has the backing of nearly half of the Attorneys General in the US.

In their brief, primarily written by the offices of Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich and Missouri AG Eric Schmitt, the AGs argue that the collective histories of the 23 responding states demonstrates that “subjective-issue handgun permit regimes, such as N.Y. Penal Law §400.00, are unconstitutional because they impose state-created, subjective conditions upon the exercise of a fundamental constitutional right.”

The Amici States emphasize two reasons that this case warrants the Court’s review. First, empirical data and the States’ experience with objective- issue regimes demonstrate that these subjective-issue regimes undermine the very public-safety purposes that they purport to advance. Citizens that receive permits are significantly more law-abiding than the public at large, and studies link objective-issue regimes with decreased murder rates and no rise in other violent crimes. Public safety is also increased at the individual level when citizens carry for selfdefense and respond to a criminal attack with a firearm; these defensive gun uses leave the intended victim unharmed more frequently than any other option and almost never require firing a shot.