A New York state judge dismissed a challenge to New York’s controversial and sweeping gun control law, rejecting a state constitutional challenge over procedure in which the law was passed.
Robert Schulz of the group “We the People of New York,” along with hundreds of co-plaintiffs, sought an injunction claiming the law was rushed through the legislature when Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, waived the 3-day waiting period for passing legislation. The three-day period is intended to allow legislators to read a bill, but Cuomo made the exemptions after essentially detailing it an emergency measure.
But state Supreme Court Judge Thomas McNamara ruled that the state did nothing unconstitutional.
“Though plaintiffs assert in the complaint that the Safe Act infringes upon rights granted by this provision of the constitution, they do not point to any right created thereby nor is one apparent,” McNamara said in his ruling, according to the Syracuse Post Standard.
What Cuomo called a “message of necessity” to pass the bill without a normal three-day waiting period was not unconstitutional, McNamara said.
“While plaintiffs may disagree with the governor’s and the legislature’s assessment of the need to act quickly, the governor included in his certificate a recitation of his reasons for urging speedy passage,” the judge said. “That is all the constitution requires.”
Schulz said he would appeal the case.
The gun control law called the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013, better known as the NY SAFE Act, bans possession of “high capacity magazines,” expands background checks for gun buyers and gun dealers, requires registry of so-called “assault weapons,” broadens the definition of “assault weapon” and bans the Internet sale of guns.
I’m just genuinely confused on what is so difficult to understand about the words SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.