NEW YORK – No guns for Elmo, Spider-Man or anyone else in New York’s Times Square — and don’t try sneaking them into the subway, either.

A federal appeals court has upheld a New York state law that prohibits carrying firearms in “sensitive” areas, including popular tourist spots like Times Square, the New York City subway, and commuter trains.

The decision by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supports a 2023 lower court ruling allowing the state law to stay in effect after several gun owners challenged its constitutionality. A previous appeals court decision has upheld other aspects of the law.

The plaintiffs, Jason and Brianna Frey and William Sappe, sought an injunction to prevent enforcement of the Concealed Carry Improvement Act, which designates Times Square as a “Gun Free Zone,” bans open carry, and requires a special permit for carrying guns in New York City.

U.S. District Judge Nelson Stephen Roman rejected that request, leading to the appeal decided Friday.

The 2nd Circuit’s three-judge panel found that the contested restrictions align with the nation’s “historical tradition of gun regulations” and therefore do not infringe on the Second Amendment. They determined that the plaintiffs are “unlikely to succeed on the merits” of their case.

Times Square gun ban consistent with history, judges say

The judges pointed out that forbidding firearms in Times Square, a bustling area filled with tourists and performers, is in line with historical measures to restrict weapons in crowded locations, such as those seen in medieval England. This reasoning also applies to the subway and Metro-North commuter rail connecting the city to nearby suburbs.

The judges remarked, “No public place is more quintessentially crowded than Times Square,” comparing it to “our modern-day, electrified, supersized equivalent of fairs, markets, and town squares of old.”

Despite that, Judges Robert D. Sack, Reena Raggi and Joseph F. Bianco noted that they were not determining “the ultimate constitutionality of the challenged provisions.” They returned the case to Roman’s court for further proceedings.

Sack was appointed to the appeals court by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat; Raggi was appointed by President George W. Bush, a Republican; and Bianco was appointed by President Donald Trump, a Republican.

“The Second Circuit decision is disappointing, but not unexpected considering its palpable disdain for the Second Amendment,” said Amy Bellantoni, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, whose office defended the law in court, said in a statement: “New Yorkers deserve to feel safe on public transportation and everywhere in our state, and today’s decision affirms that right.”

“Common-sense gun laws save lives, keep guns out of sensitive community spaces, and help address the gun violence crisis,” said James, a Democrat. “New York has some of the strongest common-sense gun laws in the nation, and my office will continue to defend them and protect New Yorkers.”

Ruling is the latest one upholding New York law

Friday’s decision is the latest court ruling allowing the Concealed Carry Improvement Act to remain in place, and it echoed rulings that have echoed similar restrictions in other places. The New York law was signed in 2022 as the state’s answer to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that some of its previous gun regulations were unconstitutional.

Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and state lawmakers rewrote the regulations after the high court struck down the state’s longstanding requirement that people demonstrate an unusual threat to their safety to qualify for a license to carry handguns outside the home.

Last year, the 2nd Circuit upheld other parts of the law, including requirements that concealed carry permit applicants demonstrate good moral character, disclose the names of household and family members, submit to an in-person interview, provide character references and undergo 16 hours of training.

In that ruling, the appeals court also upheld provisions banning the concealed carry of firearms in certain sensitive places and allowing private property owners to post signs prohibiting guns on their property.

Federal appeals courts around the country have ruled similarly in other states, including Hawaii and Virginia, and on Sept. 10, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld New Jersey’s ban on guns in sensitive places like schools and public gatherings. Those judges also cited a historical tradition of gun regulation, writing that for certain “discrete locations” the presence of guns was “historically regulated as jeopardizing the peace or posing a physical danger to others.”