Supreme Court declines to halt Delaware and Maryland gun control laws

[libertybele]

Supreme Court declines to halt Delaware and Maryland gun control laws

The Supreme Court on Monday turned down requests from Second Amendment activists to pause gun control laws in Delaware and Maryland, keeping up a trend of avoiding challenges against state gun laws in recent years.

Justices rejected an appeal by a group of Second Amendment advocates who lost lower court challenges to obtain a preliminary injunction against Delaware's ban on "assault weapons" and magazines that can carry more than 17 rounds. The Democratic-controlled state legislature passed the law in 2022, with Gov. John Carney (D-DE) calling it an effort to prevent mass shootings.

The Supreme Court also turned down gun rights plaintiffs who challenged Maryland's handgun licensing regime. The pro-gun group, known as Maryland Shall Issue, argued lower courts misapplied the 2022 NYSRPA v. Bruen decision, a 6-3 case that expanded Second Amendment rights and held that gun laws must be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulations.

In the case against Delaware's law, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit upheld a district court judge's denial for a preliminary injunction against the 2022 gun control law, writing that "we see nothing extraordinary here" that would justify halting the law. Last August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled 14-2 that Maryland's licensing regime, which requires applicants to submit fingerprints, undergo a four-hour safety course, and wait up to 30 days for approval, is constitutional under Bruen.

Notably, the Supreme Court has not acted on separate appeals involving challenges to Maryland's ban on assault weapons and one over Rhode Island's large capacity ammunition magazines ban.

Since the Bruen decision three years ago, the high court has been petitioned over a number of cases seeking to curtail state-specific gun control laws as lower courts have struggled to apply the new gun precedent consistently................

https://gazette.com/news/wex/supreme-court-declines-to-halt-delaware-and-maryland-gun-control-laws/article_b0bf9dee-4b3d-54bc-bbc5-fde935a33f90.html#tncms-source=infinity-scroll-summary-siderail-next

[Timber Rattler]

Since the Bruen decision three years ago, the high court has been petitioned over a number of cases seeking to curtail state-specific gun control laws as lower courts have struggled to apply the new gun precedent consistently liberal judges have tried to either ignore it or else find ways around it................

Fixed.

[Sighlass]

Any way of finding out which Justices went against the Second Amendment here? Is there a vote that says which Justices didn't want to hear/review Marylands commie rules. Seems what Supreme Court members we have are FUDDS.

[Timber Rattler]

Any way of finding out which Justices went against the Second Amendment here? Is there a vote that says which Justices didn't want to hear/review Marylands commie rules. Seems what Supreme Court members we have are FUDDS.

I read about the ruling on the Bearing Arms blog but found it confusing.  I think it's a process thing, and that the justices may be waiting another another similar but more overarching case that's working its way through the federal appeal system to finally deal with it.  Class John Roberts.  It's all about the process and not actually short-circuiting clear unconstitutional wrongs.

[berdie]

My understanding is that Federal Law (The Constitution) supersedes state law.

So this should be a "nothing".

[Sighlass]

I read about the ruling on the Bearing Arms blog but found it confusing.  I think it's a process thing, and that the justices may be waiting another another similar but more overarching case that's working its way through the federal appeal system to finally deal with it.  Class John Roberts.  It's all about the process and not actually short-circuiting clear unconstitutional wrongs.

Thanks @Timber Rattler

[Timber Rattler]

My understanding is that Federal Law (The Constitution) supersedes state law.

So this should be a "nothing".

It's all about process with this court.  Roberts generally insists that all cases originating in state courts wind their way up through those systems first, and then wind their way up the federal system once the State Supreme Courts rule one way or the other.  He doesn't like it when petitioners try to short circuit the judicial and appeals processes.