Sullivan Act

Sullivan introduced the state-wide legislation "partly in response to a marked increase in highly publicized violent street crime below Fourteenth Street" (i.e. in the largely Italian immigrant Lower East Side) and was partially an anti-Italian reaction to perceived violent crime committed by Italian immigrants in New York City. Sullivan and other prominent New Yorkers were under public pressure to act, in the form of letters and recommendations from George Petit le Brun, who worked in the city's coroner's office, after a "brazen early afternoon" murder-suicide near Gramercy Park. The law went into effect on August 31, 1911. The law also made it a felony to own or sell other items defined as so called "dangerous weapons", including "blackjacks, bludgeons, sandbags, sandclubs, billies, slungshots and metal knuckles." According to Richard F. Welch, who wrote a 2009 biography of Sullivan, "all the available evidence indicates that Tim's fight to bring firearms under control sprang from heartfelt conviction." At the time, "some complained that the law would only succeed in disarming lawful citizens, while others suspected that Sullivan was just trying to rein in the thugs on his own payroll." Lawman Bat Masterson, a friend of Sullivan's, criticized the law as "obnoxious" and said that he questioned Sullivan's mental state of mind over the law. ==New York City license holders==

In New York State, outside New York City, the practices for issuing concealed carry licenses vary from county to county. In New York City, the licensing authority is the police department, which rarely issues carry licenses to anyone except retired police officers, or those who can describe why the nature of their employment (for example, a diamond merchant who regularly carries gemstones, or a district attorney who regularly prosecutes dangerous criminals) requires carrying a concealed handgun. Critics of the law have alleged that New Yorkers with political influence, wealth, or celebrity appear to be issued licenses more liberally. The New York Post, the New York Sun, and other newspapers have periodically obtained the list of licensees through Freedom of Information Act requests and have published the names of individuals they consider to be wealthy, famous, or politically connected that have been issued carry licenses by the city police department. Several NYPD license division officers and others were convicted in federal court for participating in a bribery scheme where they accepted bribes from at least 2012 through 2016 in exchange for hundreds of permits in instances where permits would not be approved. These officers conspired with "expediting" businesses, and some created these businesses after retiring from the police force. ==Litigation==

In the case Kachalsky v. Cacace (2012), a unanimous panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the Sullivan Act, and rejected challengers' positions that New York state handgun law violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. On April 26, 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, seeking to examine whether the Sullivan Act and the may-issue policies, in general, violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. On June 23, 2022, the "proper cause" requirement of the Sullivan Act was struck down by the Supreme Court of the United States, leaving the general licensing requirement in place. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, (Bruen), marked a significant point in Second Amendment cases. Before Bruen, the United States Supreme Court had not made a major development in second amendment cases since its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 (Heller). As such, the court's decision had a major effect on all fifty states. In Bruen, the majority set a new standard for evaluating the constitutionality of regulations that restrict Second Amendment freedoms. As such, laws in which restricted or barred an individuals ability to keep said arms in their homes usually violate the Second Amendment. The court applied the test established in Bruen requiring the government to "affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms." Specifically, Range pled guilty to the misdemeanor of making a false statement to obtain food stamps, which was punishable by up to five years' incarceration. As such, Range was denied the ability to purchase a firearm pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1) which makes it unlawful for any person who has been convicted in any court, of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition. However, the court noted that post Bruen, the proper standard is no longer means-end scrutiny, but rather the focus on history and tradition. Consequently, the court held that the government did not show that the historical tradition of firearms regulation supports depriving Range of his Second Amendment right to possess a firearm. As such, the court opened the door for individuals who would otherwise be barred from exercising their second amendment right as a result of the fact that their crimes may technically classified as felonies due to their punishable years, to exercise such rights. ==Controversy==

The first person convicted under the law was an Italian immigrant named Marino Rossi who was traveling to a job interview and carrying a revolver for fear of the Black Hand. At sentencing the judge, condemning Italian immigrants in general, declared: "It is unfortunate that this is the custom with you and your kind, and that fact, combined with your irascible nature, furnishes much of the criminal business in this country." Before Marino's arrest, others had been arrested under the new law but were released without charges. Whether this was part of the law's intent, it was passed on a wave of anti-immigrant and anti-Italian rhetoric as a measure to disarm an alleged Italian and immigrant criminal element. The police department who granted the licenses could easily discriminate against "undesirable" elements. After Rossi's conviction The New York Times called this "warning to the Italian community" both "timely and exemplary". According to Peter Duffy of The New York Times, the Sullivan Law did not just affect Second Amendment laws in New York state; it also became the blueprint for legislation that was later enacted throughout the United States. Moreover, Duffy noted that the bill itself received serious hostility from gun manufacturers, and that one state senator even noted that Sullivan's bill "won't stop murders." There were others who also tied the act to Sullivan's ties with criminals so much so that they "suggested that Big Tim pushed through his law so Tammany could keep their gangster allies under control." ==Constitutionality==

In his concurring opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, Justice Samuel Alito wrote: ==See also==