Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Tuesday, June 25, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

High court shoots down challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban 

The justices refused to jump into a decade-old fight over the state's prohibition of semiautomatic rifles.

WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court on Monday declined three Marylanders' request to review the constitutionality of a state law banning AR-15-style rifles that was passed in the wake of the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

The plaintiffs, Dominic Bianchi, David Snope and Micah Schaefer, claim they need the weapons for self-defense and asked the justices to leapfrog an appeals court to review the assault weapons ban. The justices did not explain their decision to deny the appeal and there were no noted dissents. 

Bianchi, Snope and Schaefer said Maryland had unconstitutionally prohibited the most popular firearm in America, made so because they are light and easy to shoot — and noted the use of AR-15s by women and disabled Americans. 

“From the founding of this nation, the rifle has been a paradigmatic American arm, facilitating the struggle for independence from the British and serving as ‘the companion’ and ‘tutelary protector’ of the westward pioneers,” David Thompson, an attorney with Cooper & Kirk representing the residents, wrote in their petition.

“The modern iteration of this paradigmatic arm is epitomized by the AR-15-style rifle, a semiautomatic firearm that is popular for self-defense, hunting, and range training due to its accuracy, ease of use, and ergonomic design.” 

Maryland's 2012 law prohibits the sale, transfer, purchase or receipt of an assault long gun or any copycat weapon. This includes AR-15-style rifles with detachable magazines and either a folding stock or grenade launcher. 

The state said it bans the highly dangerous, military-style assault weapons that have been used in a series of highly publicized mass shootings and argues that because AR-15s are like the military’s M16s, they are not protected by the Second Amendment. 

Maryland countered Bianchi’s historical argument, noting that the country has a history of regulating firearms that present a danger to the public. 

“These predecessor laws, regulating an array of extraordinarily dangerous arms and hazardous features, imposed ‘comparable burden[s]’ and are ‘comparably justified’ to Maryland’s assault weapons ban, which responds to the recent advent of mass public shootings committed with a particular type of highly dangerous arm,” Ryan Dietrich, Maryland’s assistant attorney general, wrote in the state’s brief.  

The District of Columbia and nine other states have similar restrictions. 

Maryland’s ban has been under fire since 2013 when a different group of residents and Second Amendment groups challenged it. The Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of the state, agreeing that AR-15-style weapons are military-style firearms that are not protected by the Second Amendment. The en banc court noted that the Defense Department had purchased over 100,000 AR-15 rifles and renamed them to create the M16

Bianchi, Snope and Schaefer filed their challenge three years after litigation in the 2013 challenge ended. The case was dismissed for being too similar to the 2013 litigation, but the Supreme Court revived it when it decided NYSRPA v. Bruen

The Fourth Circuit was ordered to reconsider Bianchi’s challenge in light of the new standard set in Bruen. The appeals court heard oral arguments in December 2022 but its ruling was delayed by a challenge to Maryland’s handgun qualification license statute. After the law was found to be unconstitutional, the appeals court granted a rehearing of that case and Bianchi’s challenge. 

Less than a month later, the residents asked the Supreme Court to intervene.

The justices’ denial sends the case back to the Fourth Circuit for rehearing. Bianchi then will have another chance to petition for the high court’s review. 

The Supreme Court did not act on a similar challenge to Illinois’ assault weapons ban. 

Follow @KelseyReichmann
Categories / Appeals, Second Amendment

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...