New York’s Anti-Constitution Attorney General, Letitia James is being reminded yet again that her job is to uphold the Constitution, not manipulate it to her liking.
In Heeter v. James, a case out of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, Judge John Sinatra has just granted standing for a challenge to New York State’s ban on body armor. Sinatra decided that the challenge could proceed.
Somewhere along the line, Democrat politicians in New York State, have not only decided that they don’t want the good people of New York to be able to defend themselves with a gun, they’ve also decided that they should be completely vulnerable by declaring a ban on body armor. As you can imagine, New York residents have decided they must and will do everything they can to protect themselves from the criminal element that Governor Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James have been putting back on the streets through early release, bail reform, and relaxed sentences. Creating a victim/predator society in the state of New York seems to have been a top priority, especially since Kathy Hochul was appointed the position of Governor by the disgraced former Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Judge Sinatra seems to recognize the destructive nature of the New York State Legislature and has given the Plaintiffs, in this case, an opportunity to challenge the State on this ridiculous body armor ban, which appears to be nothing more than an exercise of power by a very angry and over-zealous gun-grabbing Attorney General. As clearly defined in the Second Amendment, American Citizens have the right to ‘keep and bear arms.’ Precedent from the 2008 Heller case includes body armor as ‘arms’ because it can be used defensively.
Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in the Heller case stated, “Before addressing the verbs ‘keep and bear,’ we interpret their object: ‘Arms.’ The 18th-century meaning is no different from the meaning today. The 1773 edition of Samuel Johnson’s dictionary defined ‘arms’ as ‘weapons of offense, or armour of defense.”
Judge Sinatra found that the Plaintiffs do, in fact, have ‘standing’ and denied Letitia James’ motion to dismiss the case. The case can move forward, and the Plaintiffs can sue to stop this unconstitutional body armor ban.
Brandon Combs from Firearms Policy Coalition [FPC] said, “New York’s body armor ban shows that the State’s commitment to authoritarianism has collapsed into absurdity, making it a crime to buy and use simple personal protective equipment.” Combs went on to say, “New York laws have gone so far off the deep end that it would surprise exactly no one if Governor Hochul and her goons banned safety glasses next. FPC looks forward to eliminating this unconstitutional law and teaching New York another lesson about constitutional protected rights.”
On November 8, 2024 Judge John Sinatra stated the following in his opinion, “Here, Plaintiffs have demonstrated injury-in-fact. They allege ‘an intention to engage in a course of conduct,’ arguably protected by the Second Amendment but proscribed by New York law. Specifically, [plaintiffs] intend to exercise [their] right to keep and bear body armor for lawful purposes. And because of the challenged restrictions, they are ‘unable to purchase body armor in New York.’ Plaintiffs also allege a ‘credible threat’ of future enforcement. Specifically, they allege that the Attorney General is responsible for enforcing New York’s restrictions on the sale of body armor imposed by New York law.”
Attorney General Leticia James announced that this ban on body armor, among other restrictions, was put in place due to her commitment to keep people safe from the so-called “gun violence epidemic.”
James may not only be acting on political motivation, but her sense of logic appears to be in a serious state of decline with respect to this issue. She seems to believe that removing the ability of people to protect themselves from gunshots by using protective armor will somehow make them safer. If one of New York’s unnecessarily released criminals were to shoot someone, most people would agree that body armor could be the very thing that would save the life of the victim. We have yet to hear James explain how removing this defensive device from public use would be the safer option.
James also announced that “the time for thoughts and prayers alone has long passed,” and she urged other states to follow suit.
Judge Sinatra appears to understand that the use and possession of body armor is a fundamental Constitutional right. We will see how this case plays out.
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.
