Federal court upholds Maryland 'assault weapons' ban

A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday upheld a Maryland law banning assault weapons, ruling that the law does not violate the Second Amendment.

The Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and several Maryland citizens brought the case challenging the constitutionality of the state's “military-style assault weapons” ban, which prohibits the sale and possession of the AR-15, AK-47 and Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle, among others. The ban has been in place since 2013 following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting that killed 20 children and six adults in Connecticut.

“The assault weapons at issue fall outside the scope of protection afforded by the Second Amendment because, in essence, they are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are inadequate and disproportionate to the need self-defense,” the judge said. J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote in the decision. “Furthermore, Maryland's law fits comfortably within our nation's tradition of regulating firearms. It is just another example of a state regulating excessively dangerous weapons once it becomes clear its incompatibility with a legal and safe society, even though it retains avenues of armed self-defense.”

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) President Brandon Combs said in a statement following the decision that the group plans to bring the lawsuit to the Supreme Court.

“FPC will take the Fourth Circuit's terrible decision to the Supreme Court without delay. Our goal is simple: to end all bans on so-called “assault weapons” across the country. And we hope to do just that,” Combs wrote.

The plaintiffs had taken the case to the Supreme Court in May, arguing that the lower court was taking too long to rule, but the Court threw out the case at the time after Maryland officials argued that the appeals court should speak first seconds in the Associated Press.

Five justices dissented from the ruling, and in a dissenting opinion, one justice argued that the ban violated the Second Amendment and accused the court's majority of “cherry picking.”[ing]” historical regulation to create a false precedent.

“The Second Amendment is not a second-class right subject to the capricious discretion of federal judges,” Circuit Judge Julius Richardson wrote in the dissenting opinion. “Its mandate is absolute and, applied here, unequivocal.”

The court's decision was supported by eight additional judges.

The Second Amendment Foundation, the Citizens' Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Maryland Attorney General did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Latest messages from Jaryn Crouson (see everything)

We have zero tolerance for comments that contain violence, racism, profanity, profanity, doxing, or rude behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it, click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for engaging with us in a fruitful conversation.