- The lawsuit challenges Maryland’s restrictive concealed carry statute, BANNING WHERE CITIZENS can carry firearms.
- Maryland is attempting to virtually PROHIBIT LAWFUL CONCEALED CARRY in almost every venue in the state.
- Maryland’s is just adopting more restrictive gun laws INSTEAD OF COMPLYING with the new guidelines.
Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its allies in a federal challenge of Maryland’s restrictive concealed carry statute today filed their reply to the state’s arguments against an earlier motion for a preliminary injunction in the case known as Novotny v. Moore.
The response brief was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.
SAF is joined in the case by Maryland Shall Issue, the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, all of whom possess “wear and carry permits,” including Susan Burke of Reisterstown, Esther Rossberg of Baltimore, and Katherine Novotny of Aberdeen, for whom the lawsuit is named. They are represented by attorneys David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C., Mark W. Pennak at Maryland Shall Issue in Baltimore, and Matthew Larosiere from Lake Worth, Fla.
The lawsuit focuses on SB1, a bill signed by Gov. Wesley Moore, which has added new restrictions on where legally-licensed citizens may carry firearms for personal protection.
Maryland is attempting to wildly expand so-called “sensitive places” in an attempt to virtually prohibit lawful, licensed concealed carry in almost every venue in the state outside of someone’s home or business.
“As we maintained in our initial lawsuit, the State of Maryland is desperately trying to justify its extremist policy by offering alleged historical analogues that don’t really exist,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “As we noted earlier, instead of trying to comply with the new guidelines set down in the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling last year, Maryland lawmakers responded by adopting gun laws more restrictive than they were before. This is tantrum-level stubbornness usually confined to elementary school playgrounds, and it doesn’t belong in state legislatures or governors’ offices.”
“Today’s brief further underscores the fact that Maryland’s recently enacted restrictions on carry are incompatible with this nation’s history and tradition of firearms regulation,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “In defense of its law, Maryland grasps at straws and reasoning well removed from a logical pathway to justify its new existence. Our brief systemically refutes the positions put forth by the government and demonstrates that the challenged restrictions are constitutionally impermissible.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 720,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
One principle I’ve read about is that if something is legal, you cannot regulate it to the point that people can’t do it. Consider an HOA allowing people to mount satelite dishes only in spaces where the satelite is not visible from the dish. Or a city prohibiting any adult entertainment within a mile of a place children are known to congregate. SCOTUS has already pretty much said you cannot ban concealed carry AND open carry. One option must be kept available. New York and New Jersey have already tried to make nearly the whole state a “sensitive place” and… Read more »
Permits are meaningless if they are not honored. And stop trusting cops. They are never going to trust you.