Court Issues Preliminary Injunction In SB 1 Case

Partially reprinted from THE TRUTH ABOUT GUNS

A U.S. District Court judge in Maryland has granted in part a motion for a preliminary injunction in two cases—including one involving the Second Amendment Foundation—challenging Maryland’s “sensitive places” law. The law goes into effect on October 1.

There is a similar case already in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Second Amendment Law Center filed an amicus brief along with several of our strategic partners supporting the related case of Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Montgomery County. Joining 2ALC in this brief was the California Rifle and Pistol Association, Second Amendment Defense and Education Coalition, Guns Save Life, Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners of California, Gun Owners Foundation, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Novotny v. Moore, was filed earlier this year and challenges the same law, which places broad restrictions on where a legally-licensed private citizen may carry a firearm for personal protection. The decision by Judge George L. Russell, III consolidates the Novotny case with another action known as Kipke v. Moore.

Under the trial court judge’s order, Maryland is enjoined from enforcing laws restricting the carrying of firearms in locations selling alcohol, private buildings or property without the owner’s consent, and within 1,000 feet of a public demonstration. However, he left intact the prohibitions on carry in health care facilities, school grounds, government buildings, museums, state parks and state forests, casinos, mass transit facilities, stadiums, racetracks, and amusement parks.

The district court case is not over. The provisions that the court left intact will be re-challenged in future court filings and hearings. 2ALC will coordinate more amicus briefing when the time comes.

The case in the Court of Appeal is also still pending.

Subscribe below for updates on this and other cases impacting your rights…and please consider joining our Founders Circle to support 2ALC in fighting for the Second Amendment in Maryland and across the country! A $75 donation will land you this handsome 2ALC challenge coin, but hurry, supplies are limited!

Join today, supplies are limited!

Keep me up to date in Maryland!

* indicates required

2ALC Amicus Brief Filed in Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Montgomery County

As promised in our previous post (see below), the Second Amendment Law Center recently filed an amicus brief along with several of our strategic partners supporting the case of Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Montgomery County. Joining 2ALC in this brief are the California Rifle and Pistol Association, Second Amendment Defense and Education Coalition, Guns Save Life, Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners of California, Gun Owners Foundation, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Various anti-gun-owner states have passed expansive “sensitive places” legislation that invalidates carry permits in most places and effectively makes carry permits useless. Fighting these vindictive and retaliatory efforts to get around the mandates of the Bruen decision is a primary focus of leading 2A advocacy groups. If these laws survive the many legal challenges brought to strike them down, the flanking approach is liable to spread to other states. So 2ALC will continue to fight these laws everywhere.

At issue in the Maryland case are the provisions of Section 57-1.1 of the Montgomery County Code severely restricting, among other things, the carrying of firearms in “places of public assembly.” After Bruen, came out, Montgomery County passed the ordinance to expand the definition of "place of public assembly," where carry permits would be invalid and guns banned, to include just about all of the county. It also removed exceptions to carry in those places that previously existed for people with licenses to carry in public.

Following a somewhat complex history in the courts, the case is on appeal from a denial of a motion for an injunction to block the ban on handgun possession by CCW holders at or within 100 yards of any “place of public assembly.”

As we’ve seen in other states like Hawaii, Illinois, and California, amicus campaigns are playing an increasingly important role in the post-Bruen world.

Please sign up below to stay updated on our efforts in Maryland and CONTRIBUTE to support this effort to protect our rights and STOP THE SPREAD!

Keep me up to date in Maryland!

* indicates required

2ALC PREPARES AMICUS BRIEF CAMPAIGN SUPPORTING CHALLENGES TO MARYLAND PUBLIC CARRY BAN  

The Maryland Shall Issue v. Montgomery County case primarily challenges the provisions of Section 57-1.1 of the Montgomery County Code severely restricting, among other things, the carrying of firearms in “places of public assembly.” The case is now on appeal, and the Second Amendment Law Center is working to coordinate an amicus brief campaign supporting the challengers, just as 2ALC has done in California, Illinois, Hawaii, Delaware, and other states.

The case has a somewhat twisted procedural history. It started in the Maryland state court in 2021, and originally included three state law claims, as well as a federal due process claim under the Fourteenth Amendment. The county removed the case to federal court in July 2021. But the federal court severed the three state law claims from the federal claim and remanded those state law claims back to the Maryland state court. It then stayed the litigation of the Fourteenth Amendment claim that remained in federal court. 

After Bruen, Montgomery County passed an ordinance that expanded the definition of "place of public assembly", where carry permits would be invalid and guns banned, to include just about all of the county. It also removed exceptions to carry in those places that previously existed for people with licenses to carry in public. So the plaintiffs amended their complaint in state court, adding a Second Amendment claim and amending the state law claims to challenge the new law. The case was then removed to federal court again. 

The case is on appeal from a denial of motion for an injunction to block the ban on handgun possession by CCW holders at or within 100 yards of any “place of public assembly.” The trial court found that plaintiffs had legal “standing” deficiencies -- i.e., they would need to prove they had individuals with legal standing to challenge every separate place listed in the ordinance because they wanted to be able to carry in those specific places. The court held that the plaintiffs proved standing for some of the enumerated prohibited places, but not others. Then the court reviewed each individual place the plaintiffs sought to carry in and found that bans applying to each of the prohibited places likely had sufficient historical analog laws to show that the bans would pass the Bruen test. Since the court held that the plaintiffs were not likely to succeed on their Second Amendment claim, it denied the request that the law be blocked from taking effect.

The court’s denial of that request for an injunction is what is now being appealed.

The case also includes a Second Amendment challenge to the county's restrictions on "ghost guns" and privately made firearms and components, but that issue is not part of the current appeal.

Sign up below to stay informed about 2ALC’s efforts in this and other Maryland cases, and donate to support this campaign if you can. Thank you!

Keep me up to date in Maryland!

* indicates required