Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.

The Supreme Court in Maryland has opted not to review a challenge to the state’s ban on “assault weapons,” letting current legal proceedings continue. Due to this decision, Maryland’s law remains active. 

Those challenging the law had hoped the Supreme Court would intervene before the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit could rule on the ban’s constitutionality under the Second Amendment. The 4th Circuit held arguments in March but has yet to issue a verdict. Eventually, this case is expected to return to the Supreme Court following the appeals court’s decision.

Maryland’s legislation, enacted after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, criminalizes the possession, sale, transfer, or purchase of 45 specific semiautomatic weapons. Despite the ban, various other semiautomatic firearms remain permissible under the law. Alongside Maryland, nine other states and the District of Columbia have implemented similar restrictions on semiautomatic weapons. 

The Maryland ban faced legal challenges in 2020 from residents seeking to purchase the prohibited rifles, a licensed gun dealer, and several pro-Second Amendment groups, who claimed the law infringes on their constitutional rights.

Previously, the 4th Circuit upheld the ban, and the Supreme Court declined to review that decision. After a 2022 Supreme Court ruling expanded the scope of the Second Amendment, the high court directed lower courts to reassess several gun laws, including Maryland’s, using a historical consistency framework. This new standard has led to the invalidation of several longstanding gun restrictions.

Two different views:
Pro-gun rights advocates pressed the Supreme Court to bypass the appellate process, arguing the case’s significance and the lower courts’ missteps warranted immediate intervention.

Maryland officials have argued that it was premature for the Supreme Court to get involved and that the law aligns with historical firearm regulation traditions. Attorney General Anthony Brown has also defended the ban, claiming it withstands constitutional scrutiny due to its consistency with historical regulations of firearms posing significant public safety risks.