Supreme Court Denies Appeal of Maryland Assault Weapons Ban

The Supreme Court chose not to hear a challenge to Maryland’s ban on rifles like AR-15s, leaving the dispute to continue in a lower court.

Commercial firearms dealers, gun rights groups, and Maryland residents who oppose the ban argued that it violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

The challengers wanted the Supreme Court to rule on the ban’s legality before the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, made a decision.

There are still pending appeals before the Supreme Court challenging a similar ban in Illinois on assault rifles and large-capacity magazines. These cases were not addressed on Monday.

The availability of assault rifles, despite being popular among gun enthusiasts, remains a contentious issue in a country divided on how to address gun violence, including mass shootings.

The Supreme Court, leaning conservative with a 6-3 majority, typically supports Second Amendment rights. In 2022, the court acknowledged the right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, overriding gun restrictions in New York.

Two significant gun rights cases are expected to be decided by the court by the end of June. One case challenges a federal law prohibiting those under domestic violence restraining orders from owning guns. The other case questions a federal ban on “bump stocks,” which enable rapid firing in semiautomatic weapons.

In response to the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, Maryland passed a law in 2013 banning “military-style assault rifles” like the AR-15 and AK-47.

The plaintiffs in Maryland, including residents wanting to purchase the banned guns, a firearms dealer named Field Traders, and three gun rights groups, sued the state in 2020. They argue that “assault weapon” is a political term and that these guns are common among law-abiding citizens.

The 4th Circuit previously upheld Maryland’s ban, stating that assault weapons are not protected by the Second Amendment because they are akin to “weapons of war” primarily used in military service.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in the New York case, the 4th Circuit agreed to re-examine the Maryland case with all its judges. This re-evaluation is still pending.