A U.S. District Court Judge recently ruled some parts of Maryland’s gun control law as unconstitutional but upheld other elements of the law.
Judge George L. Russell, III, ruled that it is legal to carry guns in businesses that sell alcohol for consumption on premises, in a vehicle that is within 1,000 feet of a public demonstration, or on private property without the express permission of the property owner.
However, he upheld Maryland’s prohibition on guns in schools, hospitals, public sports and entertainment venues, and other public areas such as state forests and parks.
Russell issued his split ruling on Maryland’s Gun Safety Act of 2023 on Aug. 2 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.
Plaintiffs Katherine Novotny, the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and Maryland Shall Issue sued the state over the Maryland gun law on May 16, 2023. That same day, Susannah Kipke and the Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association also sued. Both suits named Gov. Westley Moore and other state officials as defendants.
The Novotny lawsuit claimed the state’s prohibition on carrying firearms in public violated the Second Amendment according to the standard set in the June 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.
In that case, the high court ruled that citizens have a constitutional right to carry guns in public for self-defense. The court held that any restriction on that right must have a historical analog, or it is unconstitutional.
Kipke’s lawsuit claimed that the state’s licensing scheme and permit requirements violated the First, Second, and 14th Amendments.
The plaintiffs said the law violated due process and equal protection guarantees because permitting was based on “subjective criteria,” and the law made exceptions for retired law enforcement officers.
The cases were consolidated in July 2023.
Russell upheld some of the state’s prohibitions, because the founders restricted firearms from polling places and some government buildings at the time the Second Amendment was ratified. Thus, the law met the history and tradition requirements of the Bruen decision, Russell ruled.
This meant the ban on firearms in schools, parks, health care facilities, and other public areas was upheld.
However, he found there were no similar prohibitions on carrying guns on private property. So, the ban on guns in bars and restaurants, private businesses, and private property without permission from the property owner was struck down.
An attorney with Maryland Shall Issue said the lawsuits were about protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.
“No one here is claiming that carrying while drinking alcohol is acceptable, and no one disputes that a property owner can exclude you if they want,” Mark Pannak, an attorney with Maryland Shall Issue who represented the Novotny plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times.
“But you shouldn’t have to worry about going to a private business or having dinner in a restaurant [while carrying a firearm].”
Pannak said his clients are happy with the partial victory but plan to continue challenging similar gun restrictions.
He said the court left in place prohibitions against carrying guns for self-protection in thousands of acres of public forest and state park land, which is open to hunting for part of the year.
“That makes no sense at all. Those areas are not remotely sensitive,” Pannak said.
Pannak pointed out that since the decision is split, either side could appeal the ruling. He would not say if his clients planned to appeal.
“We’re certainly considering our options at this point,” he said.
In an email to The Epoch Times, Aleithea Warmack spokesperson for Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown wrote that Brown had no comment on the ruling.
