Felony for Carrying on a Times Square Sidewalk: FPC Tells Court Letitia James Cannot Escape Lawsuit Over New York’s Carry Ban

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

NEW YORK, NY — Firearms Policy Coalition announced on October 13, 2026, that it has filed an opposition to New York Attorney General Letitia James’s motion to dismiss in Goldberger v. James, the group’s lawsuit challenging the state’s ban on carrying a firearm in the Times Square area. A motion to dismiss asks the court to throw a case out before it ever reaches the question that matters, which here is whether the ban is constitutional.

Briefing on James’s motion began over the summer, but the court instructed the parties to hold the documents, and they did not land on the docket until the Friday before the announcement.

The law at issue is one piece of the patchwork New York built after the Supreme Court struck down the state’s may-issue carry regime in Bruen. It makes it a felony to possess a firearm in “the area commonly known as Times Square,” and it applies even to someone licensed to carry in New York City. A violation carries one to four years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000. FPC describes the zone as a sprawling stretch of ordinary streets, sidewalks, parks, hotels, residences, and businesses. That is not a courthouse or a school. It is a neighborhood, and the state has told a vetted, licensed New Yorker that walking through it armed is a felony.

James’s motion argues two things: that she cannot properly be sued over the Times Square ban, and that the plaintiffs lack standing to sue her. Standing, in plain terms, means the plaintiffs have to show that James is someone who can actually bring this law down on them, so that a court order against her would do them some good. If she is not an enforcer, she walks out of the case.

FPC’s answer is that she is an enforcer. The opposition argues that New York law expressly allows the Attorney General, at the Governor’s direction, to step into the role of a district attorney and prosecute violations of the ban. If the plaintiffs win and the court enjoins local prosecutors, meaning it orders them to stop enforcing the ban, James could remain available to enforce it in their place. As the brief puts it: “If Plaintiffs are right that the Times Square Ban is unconstitutional, that avenue needs to be closed.” A win that leaves a back door open is not much of a win.

James also wants FPC itself out of the case, leaving only the individual plaintiffs. FPC’s brief argues that the organization meets the Supreme Court’s requirements for suing on behalf of its members, and that more recent Supreme Court precedent has undermined the Second Circuit’s rule restricting organizational plaintiffs in Section 1983 cases. Section 1983 is the federal statute that lets people sue state officials for violating their constitutional rights, and the Second Circuit, which covers New York, has been an outlier in limiting whether a membership group can bring that kind of suit for its members. FPC separately argues that it may seek equitable relief against unconstitutional government action regardless of that rule. Equitable relief is a court order stopping the enforcement, as opposed to money damages, and FPC’s point is that the right to ask for that order does not depend on the Second Circuit’s rule.

“New York’s Bruen temper tantrum has already lost in court, and Letitia James does not get to hide behind procedural games while the State threatens peaceable people with years in prison for exercising their rights. FPC and our members are directly harmed by this unconstitutional ban, and we intend to make New York answer for it on the merits,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.

The “already lost in court” line has a history. In October 2022, according to Gun Owners of America’s account of a ruling in its own challenge to New York’s post-Bruen carry restrictions, Judge Glenn Suddaby of the Northern District of New York halted key provisions and said the state could not ban guns from public places like Times Square. Whatever came after, the Times Square ban is on the books today, the state is defending it, and a licensed carrier who crosses the wrong block in Midtown is looking at a felony.

“When New York tried to nullify Bruen by banning carry nearly everywhere people actually go, FPC immediately took action and we continue to tear apart that unconstitutional regime here. FPC and our Grassroots Army will Fight Forward until the People can freely exercise their right to bear arms throughout the United States, including throughout New York City,” Combs said. FPC says it has been fighting location-based carry bans in New York, Maryland, New Jersey, and California, and that Goldberger is one front in that campaign.

More from USA Carry:

• Behind the Dry Fire – August 14, 2025
• 10 Things Concealed Carriers Should Never Do
• 4 Ways to Deter and Prevent Active Shooter Situations
• Force-on-Force Training: Why you Need It
• .30 Super Carry: New “Revolutionary” Carry Round?

That felony exposure is the mindset piece. Carrying responsibly in New York City means knowing not just whether you are licensed but exactly where an invisible line turns a lawful act into one to four years. A ban on a neighborhood, rather than a building, puts that burden on every ordinary trip through the center of the city. Goldberger v. James is about whether the state gets to keep that line at all, and the motion to dismiss is about whether the Attorney General gets to sit the fight out. The court has not ruled on the motion.

I will continue tracking Goldberger v. James as the court takes up the motion to dismiss.

Read the original story: Felony for Carrying on a Times Square Sidewalk: FPC Tells Court Letitia James Cannot Escape Lawsuit Over New York’s Carry Ban