Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
Page Number: 69

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

63 

Opinion of the Court 

ers some special need.  That is not how the First Amend-
ment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free 
exercise  of  religion.    It  is  not  how  the  Sixth  Amendment 
works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the 
witnesses  against  him.  And  it  is  not  how  the  Second 
Amendment  works  when  it  comes  to  public  carry  for  self-
defense. 

New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Four-
teenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens
with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right 
to keep and bear arms.  We therefore reverse the judgment
of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further pro-
ceedings consistent with this opinion. 

It is so ordered.