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!