New York Red Flag Law Upheld

A New York appeals court determined this week that so-called “Red Flag laws” are indeed constitutional. Although the ruling only affects New York gun owners, the case likely has wide-reaching implications on national firearms laws.

New York Red Flag Laws Upheld

New York’s Second Department of the Appellate Division ruled that the state’s Extreme Risk Protection Order, or “ERPO,” was in fact constitutional.

These types of laws, also known as “Red Flag laws,” provide a framework to temporarily disarm a person who presents a threat to themselves or the general public. They’re usually reserved for times of extreme crisis, like when a person is experiencing mental health problems.

The ruling reverses a lower court’s decision that Red Flag laws were unconstitutional.

The argument against Red Flag laws is that they deny a person due legal process by taking a person’s guns without a trial. The subject of an ERPO must later prove that they no longer present a threat to the public and deserve to have their Second Amendment rights reinstated. Gun rights advocates say that it’s too easy to abuse the Red Flag system and take firearms away from people who present no immediate danger to the public.

The Context

This court’s ruling isn’t really much of a surprise. New York is one of the least gun-friendly states in the country, and its courts have consistently ruled in favor of gun control in the past.

This decision will inevitably be appealed. Since Red Flag laws are one of the main things gun rights groups are taking aim at right now, I’d expect to see this pushed all the way to the US Supreme Court.

However, it’s not certain that the Supreme Court will even hear the case. Recently, the court has been remanding some gun-related rulings back to lower courts. This means that the Supreme Court has been sending cases back down to lower courts to re-try them rather than hearing arguments itself.

Final Thoughts

I personally am split on Red Flag laws. On one hand, I do believe that they deny due process to an individual by removing their right to bear arms without a trial. However, in some situations, it may be necessary.

I experienced this myself firsthand. I recently had to take a friend’s guns away while they were experiencing a mental health crisis. I locked their firearms in my safe and told them they could have them back when they got help. So, I understand how it can sometimes be necessary to temporarily disarm some individuals.