The US Supreme Court again chose not to review New York’s gun restrictions. 

This decision marks the third time the Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal from New York residents in Antonyuk v James, a case that attempts to counter New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act. 

The Challenged New York Gun Laws

Antonyuk v. James challenges New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). Enacted in 2022, the CCIA strengthens certain requirements for concealed carry permits in New York.

At the heart of the current challenge to the CCIA is the law’s “good moral character” provision. The CCIA limits concealed carry permits to those who can show they meet the law’s “good moral character” requirements.

Demonstrating compliance with these provisions can be tough. New Yorkers need to submit personal information and undergo a process of screening their background and other key information. For example, family and household members also had to be listed on a petition for a concealed carry permit.

Challengers to the law initially pointed to the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down a similar New York law. 

In the most recent appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, challengers asked two questions. The first focused on the proper legal and historical standard for evaluating gun-related laws under the Second Amendment. The second question asked whether the CCIA “permissibly requires ‘the people’ to convince government officials of their ‘good moral character’ before exercising their Second Amendment rights.” 

Decisions in Lower Courts

The CCIA has been the subject of repeated appeals since New York residents first filed a case challenging its provisions. 

Various challenges to the law produced different results in lower courts, with lower courts differing on which provisions to allow and which to put on hold. The Second Circuit initially allowed the law to be enforced while cases proceeded through the courts. 

In January 2024, the US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal in Antonyuk v. James. The Court determined the time was not right for it to step in, as appeals were proceeding in lower courts. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately, expressing the opinion that the case should return to the Supreme Court if the Second Circuit delayed its review of the case. 

In May 2024, the US Supreme Court heard the case again. This time, the case was sent back to the Second Circuit for review in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Rahimi. Rahimi reviewed a federal law that prohibited someone from possessing a firearm if they were under a domestic violence restraining order. The Supreme Court held that the rule did not violate the Second Amendment. 

The Second Circuit reviewed Antonyuk v. James in 2024 following its second return from the Supreme Court. The Second Circuit again upheld several provisions in the law after considering it in light of US. v. Rahimi.

The Supreme Court Petition and Its Results

In April 2025, the US Supreme Court again declined to review the Second Circuit’s decision in the case. The justices did not issue a comment about their decision. 

The US Supreme Court receives cases for review through a process called “certiorari.” The Court reviews petitions for certiorari (sometimes called “cert petitions”) and decides which cases it will hear. It is common for the Court to deny certiorari without explaining its reasoning, as it did on its third review of Antonyuk.

When the Supreme Court denies certiorari, refusing to hear a case, the ruling from the next highest court stands. In Antonyuk, this means that the Second Circuit’s decision to uphold several provisions of the law remains the rule. 

Provisions of the CCIA that remain in effect include: 

• The “good moral character” provision, including references, a list of people who live with the applicant, an in-person interview, and 18 hours of in-person training,
• Gun-free zones in 20 types of “sensitive locations,” including health-care facilities, polling places, and other areas. 

Working out the details of how these rules apply in individual cases, however, will take work. An experienced attorney can help. 

Are You Currently Facing Gun Charges? Speak With An Experienced NY Gun Crime Attorney Today

U.S. citizens may have a Second Amendment right to access firearms, but states and the federal government can still levy criminal penalties for certain types of gun use. Gun charges can carry heavy penalties. 

If you’re facing an arrest or charge for a gun-related crime, speak to the experienced New York criminal defense attorneys at the Brill Legal Group today. We can help you build a strong defense and protect your legal rights throughout the process.