Supremacy Clause - Fed vs State?

[shield20]

with regards to The Gun Free School Zone Act.

OK we are aware of this:

Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
The Supremacy Clause establishes the Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The Constitution is the highest form of law in the American legal system. State judges are required to uphold it, even if state laws or Constitutions conflict with the clause.

NOW, the Federal Gun Free School Zone law states that the Gun Free School law: Subparagraph (A)does NOT apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the lawenforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;


While NYS Penal Law states:

Section 265.01 Criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree
A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree when:
(1) ...
(3) He knowingly has in his possession a rifle, shotgun or firearm in or upon a building or grounds, used for educational purposes, of any school, college or university, except the forestry lands, wherever located, owned and maintained by the State University of New York college of environmental science and forestry, without the written authorization of such educational institution; or ...

*******

NYS DEFINITELY has a license program for CCW that meets the criteria spelled out in the Federal Act.

SOO, an obvious direct conflict between a Federal LAW and a State law - would not the Federal Law trump the State Law? If Not, WHY NOT?

 

[deadin]

if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the lawenforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

I suppose one could read the above to apply to a "License to carry a weapon on a school ground" (i.e. LEO, etc.) NOT necessarily a "License to carry a Concealed Weapon"

 

[Outlaws]

Judges have to enforce Federal laws. That said, it doesn't prevent states from being more strict than the Fed.

 

[GRIZ22]

Shield, I'm not a lawyer but I think it goes something like this.

States can have laws that are more restrictive but can't have laws contradicting Federal law. To use the example you gave a state can't have a law that says anyone can carry a fireram on a school's property but can have a law prohibiting it. I believe there are states that don't prohibit carrying firerarms on school property but the Federal law prescribes what the person must have to make it legal. Contradiction and restriction are of course relative terms.

Some states require a purchase permit and other restrictions to buy a handgun. Gun friendly states have you fill out the 4473 and pass the NICS check. Both states are following Federal law.

All of this must make sense to lawyers.