The U.S. Supreme Court refused to weigh in on whether Second Amendment rights extend outside the home.
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to take on a case that could have set a precedent for carrying guns in public.
The case in question, Drake v. Jerejian, is about a New Jersey law that requires gun owners to prove a “justifiable need” to carry a handgun in public for self defense.
Considering a Concealed Carry License?These 10 compact handguns will get the job done.
Had the Supreme Court Justices challenged the law, it would’ve been the most significant gun-rights case since District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, according to USA Today.
The ruling in that case upheld the public’s right to keep handguns in the home for self defense.
Most states have restrictions for carrying guns in public, whether openly or concealed. Although, the federal government has not yet made a ruling on the matter.
The Drake v. Jerejian case has brought the issue back into the public spotlight.
“Drake presents very strong splits on carrying outside the home and the need for evidence in Second Amendment cases,” said Alan Gura, a lawyer representing the parties challenging the New Jersey law.
Last year, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled that “the Second Amendment does require that the state permit some form of carry for self-defense outside the home.”
They also ruled that, “states may not destroy the right to bear arms in public under the guise of regulating it.”
In other gun rights news, Georgia recently passed a gun bill that allows licensed gun owners to carry handguns in churches and government buildings. The Safe Carry Protection Act, dubbed by some as the “Guns Everywhere Bill,” will allow more guns in public places than any time in the previous century.
What do you think about having to provide a “justifiable need” for carrying guns in public for self defense? Share your thoughts in the comments section.