New Jersey & California Remove Unconstitutional Requirement From Concealed Carry License Process

Last week, the Supreme Court released two monumental legal opinions. In one, SCOTUS affirmed that words in the Bill of Rights actually mean what they mean. In the other, the Court gave power back to the people, and ruled it is not the Court's duty to inject words into the Constitution and make law for all 50 states.

We have already seen impact just in the few days since SCOTUS handed down their decisions.

second amendment us constitution

SCOTUS Ruling Results in Changes to CA and NJ Permit Requirements—

The Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen found that states that required a concealed carry applicant to show a specific need in order to get a license unconstitutional. The ruling affirmed the constitutional right for an individual to carry a gun outside of their home. As a result, two of the 7 “may issue” states which had these arbitrary means tests for a constitutionally protected right, revised their license requirements.

The Attorney's General of two states hostile to the Second Amendment, California and New Jersey issued changes to their respective states' permit process.

concealed carry gear link for guardian nation

California DOJ Legal Alert—

Here is the legal alert issued by the California Department of Justice.

link to comparison of insurance companies

New Jersey DOJ Legal Opinion—

New Jersey is another state which applied unconstitutional restrictions on its residents' requests to carry a firearm. As in California, New Jersey's Attorney General released a Law Enforcement Directive which addresses the changes to the license requirements.

Will More State Follow Suit?

It is my guess that the remaining states, New York, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, and Massachusetts, will amend their concealed carry license requirements in similar ways. However, I don't think that any of these states will stop there. I expect a counter move by legislatures in these states.

We know that the ‘proper cause' permit requirement does nothing for public safety. People prohibited legally from possessing firearms still can't get a permit. They can, however, still carry a gun concealed, provided they don't get caught. So states added the ‘proper cause' requirements simply to frustrate gun owners and make the process more difficult for the law abiding. With the Supreme Court's ruling that for a constitutionally protected right is only available after a means test as unconstitutional, anti-gun, anti-freedom, law-makers are sure to craft restrictions on their residents' gun rights in other ways.

What do you guys think about the ruling and the response from anti-gun legislatures? Leave a comment below.

trauma gear banner

About Matthew Maruster

I follow my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who is the eternal co-equal Son of God. I currently live in Columbus, Ohio with my wife and daughter. I served in the Marine Corps Infantry. I was a Staff Sergeant and served as a Platoon Sergeant during combat in Iraq. After I was a police officer at a municipal agency in San Diego County. I have a Bachelors's Degree in Criminal Justice from National University. MJ Maruster Defense.

1 Comment

  1. Dave on June 27, 2022 at 10:38 am

    Having escaped Californiastan a couple of years ago to a God loving, Constitutional upholding state (Arizona), California will fight tooth and nail to develop what ever other restrictions and conditions it can to make it hard to obtain CCW’s.

    It will take years in the courts for them to be finally struck down or to a level of many others. The useless and corrupt leadership in California will do what they can to make it difficult for law abiding citizens. I hope they can fight the good fight but I’m guessing many lawsuits are forth coming.

Leave a Comment