The Implications of Drake v. Jerejiam on Second Amendment Rights
One of the key things our people need in order to achieve the American Dream is the ability to live in stable and secure homes and communities. The Second Amendment helps make this possible by protecting our citizens’ right to bear arms.
I’m disappointed the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider Drake v. Jerejiam, an important case with significant implications for Americans’ Second Amendment rights. By declining to hear the case, an earlier appellate court decision now essentially upholds a New Jersey law that requires individuals to demonstrate a “justifiable need” to carry a firearm outside one’s home in order to obtain a concealed carry permit.
Just think about this for a moment. Part of owning a firearm for self-defense is to be prepared in case, God forbid, your life or your family’s life is ever threatened, and the “justifiable need” to use it arises. That’s why a justifiable need can’t be a precondition to lawfully own a firearm and be able to carry conceal. It’s not only unconstitutional in my opinion, it also endangers honest, law-abiding Americans who simply want to be safe.
This is a dangerous precedent and attack against the Second Amendment rights of New Jersey’s residents that could have broader implications throughout the country. It’s a reminder that we must remain vigilant in our defense of the Second Amendment, not just when it comes to legislation but especially with stopping activist judges from sitting on the bench.
On this case, the courts have failed to protect against a legislative overreach against the Second Amendment, but I’m hopeful that other states will not follow suit.