Susan Chana Lask Files Second Circuit Appeal Over NYPD Gun License Delays

This federal appeal seeks enforcement of New York’s six-month statutory deadline for firearm license applications and challenges years-long administrative delays by the NYPD as a violation of constitutional rights.

Civil rights attorney Susan Chana Lask filed a federal appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on behalf of plaintiffs challenging the NYPD’s failure to comply with statutory deadlines for firearm license applications, which plaintiffs contend violates the Second Amendment.

The appeal arises from DiSalvo et al. v. The City of New York et al., No. 26-CV-00274, filed in the Eastern District of New York. Plaintiffs allege that New York Penal Law § 400 requires the City to grant or deny firearm license applications within six months of presentment, yet all five plaintiffs waited years without decisions while the NYPD License Division ignored calls and emails seeking assistance.

Only after the complaint was served and emergency injunctive relief was sought did the NYPD act on all five applications within twenty-four hours.

“A systemic failure to respect constitutional rights is underscored by NYPD’s admission that it received 23,000 firearm applications in 2025 but assigned only 80 staff members to process them. With a $6.14 billion budget, NYPD can hire enough staff to timely process applications instead of forcing citizens to file federal lawsuits before it will act.”

The appeal also challenges NYPD’s position that presentment occurs only when all documents are submitted with the application, despite the statutory requirement that action be taken within six months of presentment. Plaintiffs contend that presentment means the date the application is filed and that NYPD cannot avoid the statute by delaying responses to applicants who seek guidance on additional materials.

“I was never told within six months of filing my application, or for a year after, that documents were needed. NYPD ignored my calls and emails for a year. It took this lawsuit to get a response within 24 hours, showing NYPD could act but chooses not to.”

At a March 4, 2026 hearing, the NYPD acknowledged that its licensing regime includes multiple stages, including post-approval steps such as applying to purchase a firearm, and that those later stages have no deadlines. Judge Natasha C. Merle nevertheless held that the NYPD’s adjudication of the initial applications mooted preliminary injunctive relief, characterized plaintiffs’ request as seeking a bright-line rule for licensing deadlines, and found that Second Amendment violations do not constitute irreparable harm.

The appeal argues that plaintiffs did not ask the court to create a new constitutional deadline. They asked the court to enforce the six-month statutory deadline already imposed by New York law and to determine whether years-long delays, followed by an open-ended post-approval process, violate the Second Amendment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022).

The appeal further argues that NYPD’s decision to act only after suit was filed does not defeat judicial review of NYPD’s conduct. Plaintiffs contend that voluntary cessation cannot moot claims arising from a licensing regime that allegedly remains unlawful and continues to burden constitutional rights.