Kachalsky v. County of Westchester

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• determining that state regulation of firearms in public was enshrined with the Amendment and favored intermediate scrutiny
• determining that state regulation of firearms in public was enshrined with the Amendment and favored intermediate scrutiny
• discussing New York’s “proper cause” standard and the well-established tradition of regulations in public places enshrined with the right
• deferring to the legislature's conclusion that \public safety ... outweighs the need to have a handgun for an unexpected confrontation\
• “Because our tradition so clearly indicates a substantial role for state regulation of the carrying of firearms in public, we conclude that intermediate scrutiny is appropriate in this case.”
• “New York’s law need only be substantially related to the state’s important public safety interest. A perfect fit between the means and the governmental objective is not required.” (emphasis in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).