PL 265.01-e:
Sensitive Locations

Statutory Framework

Penal Law Section 265.01-e, enacted as part of the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) effective September 1, 2022, makes it a crime for any person to possess a firearm, rifle, or shotgun in a "sensitive location" when that person knows or reasonably should know the location qualifies as sensitive.^[1] This prohibition applies even to holders of valid concealed carry licenses. Criminal possession of a firearm in a sensitive location is a Class E felony, punishable by up to four years in state prison.^[2]

Designated Sensitive Locations

Section 265.01-e defines the following categories of sensitive locations:^[1]

Government and Public Safety

• Any place owned or under the control of federal, state, or local government for the purpose of government administration, including courts
• Polling places on election day
• Any public sidewalk or other public area restricted from general public access for a special event or function

Education and Child Care

• Schools, colleges, universities, and other educational institutions (public and private)
• Nursery schools, preschools, and summer camps
• Public playgrounds

Healthcare and Social Services

• Any location providing health, behavioral health, or chemical dependence care or services
• Homeless shelters, runaway homeless youth shelters, family shelters, shelters for adults, and domestic violence shelters

Transportation

• All forms of public transportation, including buses, subways, trains, and ferries
• Airports, bus terminals, and public transit hubs

Public Spaces and Entertainment

• Public parks and zoos
• Libraries
• Entertainment venues, including theaters, stadiums, racetracks, museums, amusement parks, and performance venues
• Times Square pedestrian zone (defined by specific street boundaries)
• Any venue licensed to sell or serve alcohol or cannabis for on-premises consumption

Religious Institutions

• Places of worship or religious observation -- however, this provision was struck down by the Second Circuit in October 2024. Firearms may now be carried in places of worship unless the institution explicitly prohibits them through signage or express policy.^[3]

Exemptions

Section 265.20 provides exemptions from the sensitive location prohibition for active law enforcement officers, peace officers, military personnel acting in an official capacity, armored car guards, and certain other authorized individuals.^[4] Persons responsible for security at a place of worship are also exempt from the places of worship provision where it remains applicable.

Signage Requirements

The state has published official signage for sensitive locations indicating that "THE POSSESSION OF FIREARMS, RIFLES, OR SHOTGUNS ON THIS PROPERTY IS PROHIBITED."^[5] Property owners at sensitive locations are encouraged to display these signs at all public entrances.

Penalties

Violation of PL 265.01-e is a Class E felony carrying a maximum sentence of up to four years in state prison. Probation is possible for first-time offenders. A conviction results in a permanent felony record and automatic revocation of any firearms license held by the offender.^[6]

Court Challenges and Current Status

The sensitive location provisions have been challenged in two separate lines of cases before the Second Circuit, both of which largely upheld the designations.

Antonyuk v. James (December 2023 / October 2024)

In its December 2023 decision, the Second Circuit largely upheld the sensitive location designations in the consolidated Antonyuk v. James litigation, finding most to be consistent with the historical tradition of firearms regulation under the Bruen framework. The places of worship ban was the only sensitive location category struck down.^[7] The court reaffirmed these holdings in October 2024 following the Supreme Court's remand in light of United States v. Rahimi. The Supreme Court declined certiorari in April 2025, leaving the remaining provisions in effect.^[8]

Frey v. City of New York (September 2025)

In a separate case, the Second Circuit issued its decision in Frey v. City of New York, No. 23-365, on September 19, 2025, providing additional binding appellate authority upholding several sensitive location designations.^[9] The three-judge panel (Sack, Raggi, Bianco) affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the Times Square sensitive-location designation is constitutional under the historical-tradition test -- analogizing Times Square to crowded public markets and large civic gatherings -- and that the public transit firearms ban (covering the subway and Metro-North systems) is constitutional as well, drawing on historical regulation of firearms on common carriers.^[10]

The Frey decision is distinct from the Antonyuk litigation and provides an independent line of Second Circuit authority supporting the constitutionality of the CCIA's sensitive location framework. Together, the two decisions significantly strengthen the legal foundation for New York's sensitive location restrictions.

See also: Penalties for CCIA Violations (Sensitive and Restricted Locations)

See also: Times Square and Public Transit Carry Prohibitions

Pending Supreme Court Case: Wolford v. Lopez

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on January 20, 2026 in Wolford v. Lopez (No. 24-1046), a case challenging Hawaii's "sensitive places" restrictions that are similar to New York's.^[*] While the case directly addresses the private property default rule (see PL 265.01-d), the Court's reasoning could also affect the constitutionality of government-designated sensitive locations under PL 265.01-e. A decision is expected by June or July 2026.