OPINION AND ORDER Before this Court is the motion of defendant New York City (the “City”) seeking to dismiss the complaint (the “Complaint”) filed by three individual plaintiffs: Charles Mills, Braden Holliday, and Craig Sotomayor. The Complaint alleges that a wide swath of the City’s firearm regulations in Title 38 of the Rules of the City of New York (“38 R.C.N.Y.”) and in the City’s Administrative Code (“N.Y.C. Admin. Code”) restricts conduct protected by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs request declaratory and injunctive relief as well as nominal and compensatory damages. On December 8, 2023, the City moved to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim (Dkt. 13). Plaintiffs opposed (Dkt. 19). By “bottom-line order” dated September 25, 2024, the Court granted the City’s motion to dismiss in full (Dkt. 26). This Opinion sets forth the reasons for that ruling and reconfirms that Order. BACKGROUND All plaintiffs reside in New York State. Complaint 3-5 (Dkt. 1)(“Compl.”). Holliday is a thirty-one-year-old African American male and a resident of the Bronx. Id. 64. He alleges that he attempted to obtain a handgun license from the License Division of the New York Police Department’s (“N.Y.P.D.”) — the department responsible for processing and issuing firearm licenses — but he learned that obtaining such a license was conditioned on his paying a mandatory application fee of $340 (and a corresponding tri-yearly renewal fee in the same amount), as well as an additional one-time fingerprinting fee of $88.50. Id.
29-30, 65-71. All of these fees, he alleges, are unconstitutional restrictions on his Second Amendment right to possess a gun. Mills is a resident of Queens and, as required by the City’s regulations, he holds two New York City licenses — a license to keep guns in his home (a “premise license”) and a license that authorizes him to purchase, own, and carry a concealed handgun on his person (a “carry license”). Id.