Libertarian Party of Erie Cnty. v. Cuomo
| Citation | 970 F.3d 106 |
| Decision Date | 11 August 2020 |
| Docket Number | Docket No. 18-386,August Term, 2018 |
| Parties | LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF ERIE COUNTY, Michael Kuzma, Richard Cooper, Ginny Rober, Philip M. Mayor, Michael Rebmann, Edward L. Garrett, David Mongielo, John Murtari, and William A. Cuthbert, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Andrew M. CUOMO, individually and as Governor of the State of New York, Letitia James, individually and as Attorney General of the State of New York, Joseph A. D'Amico, individually and as Superintendent of the New York State Police, Matthew J. Murphy, III, individually and as Niagara County pistol permit licensing officer, Dennis M. Kehoe, individually and as Wayne County pistol permit licensing officer, and M. William Boller, individually and as Erie County pistol permit licensing officer, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) |
JAMES OSTROWSKI, Buffalo, New York, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
ANISHA S. DASGUPTA, Deputy Solicitor General, New York, New York (Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General of the State of New York, Amit R. Vora, Assistant Solicitor General, New York, New York, on the brief), for Defendants-Appellees.
Morrison & Foerster, New York, New York (Jamie A. Levitt, Jayson L. Cohen, Rhiannon N. Batchelder, New York, New York; Hannah Shearer, San Francisco, California, J. Adam Skaggs, David M. Pucino, Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, New York, New York, of counsel), filed a brief for Amicus Curiae Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in support of Defendants-Appellees and Affirmance.
Clarick Gueron Reisbaum, New York, New York (Nicole Gueron, Ashleigh Hunt, New York, New York, of counsel), filed a brief for Amicus Curiae Everytown for Gun Safety, in support of Defendants-Appellees and Affirmance.
Before: KEARSE, WALKER, and JACOBS, Circuit Judges.
Plaintiffs Libertarian Party of Erie County ("Libertarian Party") et al . appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, Frank P. Geraci, Jr., Chief Judge , dismissing, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), their amended complaint brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against several state officials, alleging that the firearm licensing laws of New York State (the "State" or "New York"), see N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00, violate plaintiffs' rights under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The district court dismissed on grounds of mootness or lack of standing the claims of all but two plaintiffs, against all but two defendants, for failure to plead injury-in-fact or traceability of injury to other defendants; dismissed claims for money damages against the two remaining defendants on grounds of judicial and Eleventh Amendment immunity; dismissed the individual-capacity claims against those defendants for injunctive relief as barred by 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; and dismissed the surviving claims on the grounds that the § 400.00 licensing criteria of "good moral character," "good cause," and "proper cause" are not unconstitutionally vague, and that the statutory scheme, while impacting Second Amendment rights, relates substantially to the State's interests in public safety and thus survives intermediate scrutiny. On appeal, plaintiffs, while expressly not seeking reversal of the dismissal as to Libertarian Party, principally contend that in dismissing the claims of the individual plaintiffs, the district court erred in its rulings on standing, mootness, and judicial immunity; in applying intermediate scrutiny to the challenged licensing scheme; and in concluding that the challenged statutory criteria for licensing are not impermissibly vague. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that claims of certain plaintiffs have become moot, requiring dismissal of so much of the appeal as pursues those claims; we otherwise affirm the challenged rulings of the district court, principally for the reasons stated by that court.
The Second Amendment, which applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, see McDonald v. City of Chicago , 561 U.S. 742, 791, 130 S.Ct. 3020, 177 L.Ed.2d 894 (2010), provides: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed," U.S. Const. amend. II. In District of Columbia v. Heller , 554 U.S. 570, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008), the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment codified a pre-existing "individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation," id . at 592, 128 S.Ct. 2783.
New York State "maintains a general prohibition on the possession of ‘firearms’ absent a license." Kachalsky v. County of Westchester , 701 F.3d 81, 85 (2d Cir. 2012) (" Kachalsky "). Section 400.00 of New York's Penal Law is the State's "exclusive statutory mechanism for the licensing of firearms," id . (internal quotation marks omitted); other sections of the Penal Law provide criminal penalties for possession of a firearm without a license, see N.Y. Penal Law §§ 265.00(3), 265.01 et seq ., and 265.20(a)(3).
The State allows an application for a firearm license by a person who resides in the State or whose principal place of business is in the State. See N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(3)(a). The "[t]ypes of licenses" that may be issued include "[a] license for a pistol or revolver" for "a householder" "to ... have and possess in his dwelling," N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(a), and a license to "have and carry concealed [a pistol or revolver], without regard to employment or place of possession, by any person when proper cause exists for the issuance thereof," id . § 400.00(2)(f). To be granted a license for at-home possession of a firearm, an applicant principally must show "good moral character" and show that "no good cause exists for denial of the license." N.Y. Penal Law §§ 400.00(1)(b) and (n) (emphasis added); id . § 400.00(2)(a). To obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm in public ("concealed-carry"), one must show, in addition, that "proper cause" exists for issuance of that license. Id . § 400.00(2)(f). A concealed-carry permit encompasses an at-home license. See id .
The present action was brought by plaintiffs Libertarian Party and several New York residents. According to the amended complaint ("Complaint" or "Comp."), Libertarian Party is an association "whose platform includes support for the right to bear arms" (Comp. ¶ 3). The Complaint contains no other allegations about Libertarian Party. The individual plaintiffs (collectively "Plaintiffs") are Michael Kuzma, Richard Cooper, Ginny Rober, Philip M. Mayor, Michael Rebmann, Edward L. Garrett, David Mongielo, John Murtari, and William A. Cuthbert, who claim that various aspects of New York's firearm licensing regime violate their rights under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to bear arms.
The defendants are Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor of the State; Letitia James, the State's Attorney General; Joseph A. D'Amico, Superintendent of the State Police; Matthew J. Murphy III, a judge who is the pistol permit licensing officer for Niagara County; Dennis M. Kehoe, a judge who is the pistol permit licensing officer for Wayne County; and M. William Boller, an Acting State Supreme Court Justice who is the pistol permit licensing officer for Erie County. (See , e.g. , Comp. ¶¶ 14-22.)
Plaintiffs contend that the right to bear and carry firearms is a "fundamental" Second Amendment right that the State has no authority to license (Comp. ¶¶ 33-62). The Complaint alleged principally that the New York licensing scheme on its face (1) violates Plaintiffs' rights to possess firearms in their homes , (2) violates their rights to possess firearms in public , and (3) uses standards of "good moral character," "proper cause," and "good cause" that are so vague as to violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment .
As to individual plaintiffs, the Complaint alleged that Mayor and Cuthbert "have obtained ... pistol permits but remain under constant threat of having their licenses revoked based on application of the arbitrary and subjective criteria set forth in the statute." (Comp. ¶ 77.) The license granted to Cuthbert by Justice Boller was an at-home permit that allowed him to use the firearm for hunting and target shooting; but Cuthbert was denied a concealed-carry permit. The Complaint alleged that Mongielo held a concealed-carry permit which, after his arrest, was suspended by Judge Murphy. It alleged that the suspension was "temporar[y]." (Id . ¶ 81; see also Declaration of New York State Assistant Attorney General William J. Taylor, Jr., dated April 29, 2016 ("Taylor Decl."), Exhibit C (Niagara County Court Order signed by Judge Murphy, ordering reinstatement of Mongielo's permit)).
The Complaint alleged that Murtari applied for a pistol permit (Comp. ¶ 96), but that his application was denied by Judge Kehoe . The 10-paragraph letter of denial stated, inter alia , that Murtari's record showed that from 1998 through 2010 he had been arrested "approximately 50 times" and that Murtari's "prior conduct in failing to obey lawful orders issued in the Federal Court System, as well as in the State Family Court System, constitutes ‘good cause’ for this Court to deny [his] application for a pistol permit at this time." (Id . ¶ 98.)
As to plaintiffs Kuzma, Cooper, Rober, Rebmann, and Garrett, the Complaint contained no allegation that any of them had ever applied for a pistol permit.
The Complaint principally sought "injunctive and declaratory relief" (Comp. ¶ 76) and "compensatory and punitive damages" . Murtari also requested an order, pursuant to N.Y. C.P.L.R. Article 78, directing Judge Kehoe to issue him a pistol permit.
Defendants moved pursuant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Hogan
..., 712 F.3d at 878 (quoting United States v. Carter , 669 F.3d 411, 417 (4th Cir. 2012) ) (cleaned up); see Libertarian Party of Erie Cty. v. Cuomo , 970 F.3d 106, 128 (2d Cir. 2020) ("In applying intermediate scrutiny, we ask ‘whether the statutes at issue are substantially related to the a......
-
Sibley v. Watches
...400.00 and noting that the Second Circuit has said that there is no overbreadth argument in the Second Amendment context), aff'd , 970 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2020).Sibley attempts to tie in the First Amendment by suggesting that N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00 might chill the protected speech of potenti......
-
Zaitzeff v. City of Seattle
...by requiring people who carry weapons to do so in a manner that will not warrant alarm."); see also Libertarian Party of Erie County v. Cuomo, 970 F.3d 106, 128 (2d Cir. 2020) ("As it is ‘beyond cavil that ... states have substantial, indeed compelling, governmental interests in public safe......
-
N.Y.S. Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen
...N. J. , 910 F.3d 106, 117 (CA3 2018) ; accord, Worman v. Healey , 922 F.3d 26, 33, 36–39 (CA1 2019) ; Libertarian Party of Erie Cty. v. Cuomo , 970 F.3d 106, 127–128 (CA2 2020) ; Harley v. Wilkinson , 988 F.3d 766, 769 (CA4 2021) ; National Rifle Assn. of Am., Inc. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tob......