NYSRPA v. Bruen: Supreme Court Establishes Historical Tradition Test

On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court issued its decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen^[1], fundamentally reshaping Second Amendment law across the nation.

What Was Struck Down

The Court struck down New York's Sullivan Act, which required concealed-carry license applicants to demonstrate "proper cause," defined as a special need for self-defense beyond that of the general public. This was a "may-issue" licensing regime.

The Historical Tradition Test

In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Thomas, the Court established a new two-part framework:

1. Text: When the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.
2. History: To justify a regulation, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation. Interest balancing and means-end scrutiny are impermissible.

What Bruen Rejected

The Court explicitly rejected the two-step means-end scrutiny framework (interest balancing, intermediate or strict scrutiny) that federal circuit courts had used since Heller. This framework had been used by the First Circuit to uphold the Massachusetts assault weapons ban in Worman v. Healey.

Impact on Massachusetts

Massachusetts already operated under a shall-issue framework (since Chapter 284 of 2014), so Bruen did not directly invalidate Massachusetts licensing. However, it prompted renewed challenges to the suitability standard, the assault weapons ban, the approved firearms roster, and non-resident licensing. It also influenced the legislature to enact Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024, which attempted to fortify the state's regulatory framework against Bruen-based challenges.