Knife Rights, Inc. v. Vance, No. 13-4840 (2d Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs filed suit under 42 U.S.C. 1983, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and alleging that the New York law criminalizing the possession of “gravity knives,” N.Y. Penal Law 265.00(5), 265.01(1), is unconstitutionally vague. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, concluding that plaintiffs did not have standing. The court concluded that Plaintiffs Native Leather, Copeland, and Perez have standing to challenge defendants’ application of the statute because each has expressed a present intent to possess such knives (but for defendants’ challenged enforcement actions) and each has demonstrated a credible threat of prosecution based on defendants’ (a) recent enforcement actions against them, (b) express threat to prosecute Native Leather further under the terms of a deferred prosecution agreement, and (c) continued defense of the wrist‐flick test that allegedly prompted plaintiffs’ past violation charges. The court further concluded that its precedent precludes Knife Rights and Knife Rights Foundation from asserting standing on behalf of their members under 42 U.S.C. 1983; nor can these organizational plaintiffs demonstrate standing to sue on their own behalf based on claimed injury to their activities from expenditures diverted to oppose defendants’ actions; and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their complaint a second time to address defects in standing. Accordingly, the court affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.