How many times does the Democrat-dominant New York State legislature have to learn that the 2nd Amendment is larger than them? Apparently, at least once more. Judge Craig Stephen Brown declared New York’s Red Flag law unconstitutional since a court cannot determine mental health issues.
Judge Brown was asked to consider the legalities of New York’s Red Flag law by attorneys for defendant Corey J Monroe. Monroe was subjected to a Red Flag firearms seizure order after he was alleged to have brandished and pointed a loaded shotgun at his neighbor during a verbal dispute. Monroe denied the allegations and called on the judge to throw out the Red Flag order against him. Brown vacated the Red Flag order against Monroe and ruled the law unconstitutional.
Judge Brown made it clear that civil rights are being violated under New York’s current Red Flag Law in the way the law currently allows for the ex parte confiscation of guns without due process. It would appear Albany Democrats were denied their gun-grab dreams yet again.
New York State has just undergone a rash of school swatting calls showing how willing anti-gunners and troublemakers are to use any excuse they can to get gun owners arrested or send police on a wild goose chase. The recent school closings across the state due to false alarm shooting calls are proof. We know people can’t be trusted if they can simply accuse a gun owner of being a risk to society, but that may be exactly what gun-grabbing politicians want.
Under Mental Hygiene Law § 9.39, a person’s liberty rights cannot be curtailed unless a physician opines that a person is suffering from a condition likely to result in serious harm. That’s a roadblock that anti-gun legislatures don’t believe they should have to deal with.
Fortunately, Judge Brown saw through the charade and pointed out the fact that New York’s Red Flag Law has no provision whatsoever requiring even a single medical or mental health expert opinion prior to the confiscation of lawful citizens’ firearms. Yet, the court is required to determine whether the respondent is likely to engage in behavior that would result in serious harm to himself, herself, or others.
At least in the movie Minority Report, the mind of the person who is about to commit a crime could be read. New York Democrats have it set up so they can confiscate your guns based simply on what they think you might do.
Judge Brown used a quote from McDonald v. Chicago when he said, “Second Amendment rights are no less fundamental than…Fourth Amendment rights (the right to liberty), and must be afforded the same level of due process and equal protection.”
“Accordingly, this Court joins the Monroe County Supreme Court in holding that, “under CPLR 63-a, in order to pass constitutional muster, the legislature must provide that a citizen be afforded procedural guarantees such as a physician’s determination that a respondent presents a condition ‘likely to result in serious harm,’ before a petitioner files for a [temporary extreme risk protection order] or [extreme risk protection order]. Since this standard is required to prevent a respondent from being deprived of fundamental rights under the Mental Hygiene Law, then anything less (as contained in 63-a) deprives a citizen of a fundamental right without due process of law. This Court declares [New York’s Extreme Risk Protection Law] to be unconstitutional.”
The New York Supreme Court is the second highest court in the State under the Court of Appeals. Get ready, though, because you can bet Letitia James is getting her paperwork ready for an appeal. New York Democrats don’t take no for an answer.
About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy
Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information contact PR HERE
Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate, Host of The Loaded Mic and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” book series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on Newsmax, the Sean Hannity Show, Real America’s Voice, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun-rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun-owners.
All red flag laws are unconstitutional, stripping citizens of their rights without a hearing with them present prior to the forced invasion and theft. Further, even if a hearing were held with them present, they have not committed a crime, so they cannot be punished for what some yahoo thinks or says they might do. I don’t care what a shrink’s opinion of someone is; it’s quite easy to find a lefty shrink to say anything the court needs to hear to infringe on the 2nd.
Physicians and psychotherapists come with their own bias framework. Their decisions about others are influenced and indeed framed by those biases. The majority have been trained by left wing educational institutions and have left wing, built-in bias criteria. In short, their judgement is suspect at best. Mental health “professionals” should never be trusted to determine the relative sanity of another human being in broadly defined social settings. In clinical settings, it is entirely appropriate to determine that a “patient” has chemical imbalances leading to bi-polar or schizophrenic episodes. Prescribing medications to correct brain function may be (and I stress “may”)… Read more »
Perhaps there should be red flag laws for those who make false police reports. Those individuals seem to be the real issue here.
Most psychotherapists are more mentally damaged that thier patients . They want these people to be the judge and jury for a person’s gun rights ? Kathy Hochul you obviously are a idiot³. Good news that a judge recognizes the constitution and denied unhinged Kathy her draconian BS.
NY won’t change a thing. There are no penalties against governments breaking a law. Only against people.
The only acceptable Red Flag law is where you get a court order to subject a person to a psychiatric evaluation. Results from that can be used in a legal case to remove weapons. 72 hours of habeas corpus still applies, as does harassment lawsuits for excessive use. That is due process.