In a mixed bag ruling, a three-judge panel of the Richmond-based 4th Circuit Court of Appeals recently delivered one big win and several big losses to gun owners challenging the state’s onerous gun-control laws.
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling, Maryland was one of several anti-gun states to strengthen, rather than loosen, its gun restrictions. One new law banned carrying firearms on private property held open to the public without the owner’s express permission—a regulation commonly known as the “vampire rule,” which references the literary notion that vampires must obtain an owner’s consent before entering a building.
On January 20, the court ruled in the case Kipke v. Moore that the Old Line State’s concealed carry ban on private property open to the public is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
“Maryland’s rule would effectively declare most public places ‘gun-free zones,’” the ruling stated. “But that likely stretches the sensitive places doctrine too far. See Bruen, 597 U.S. at 31(holding that “the island of Manhattan [is not] a ‘sensitive place’”). In short, there is no relevant historical tradition supporting Maryland’s private-property consent rule, at least on this record and as to property held open to the public.”
Consequently, the court affirmed the district court’s earlier grant of summary judgment to Plaintiffs and enjoined Maryland from enforcing the regulations regarding firearms carrying restrictions in private buildings or property without the owner’s consent.
However, here’s the bad news. The remainder of the court ruling was a disaster for Maryland’s lawful gun owners.
In the ruling, the court upheld bans on carrying concealed firearms in many places in the state, including state parks, state forests, government buildings, museums, public transportation, healthcare facilities, school grounds, stadiums, racetracks, amusement parks, casinos, locations that sell alcohol and within 1,000 feet of a public demonstration.
If you think that sounds like a pretty good percentage of where a citizen might go on an average day, you’re correct. It’s still a widespread ban that, according to plaintiffs, is flatly unconstitutional.
Of course, state officials, including anti-gun Democrat Gov. Wes Moore, were thrilled with the ruling.
“Today’s ruling is a major win for public safety in Maryland,” Moore said in a news release on the ruling. “The Fourth Circuit affirmed what common sense—and our Constitution—already makes clear: we can protect the Second Amendment while also protecting Marylanders from the heightened dangers of guns in places like schools, hospitals, public transportation, parks, and other spaces where families should be able to live, learn, and move about safely.”
Striking down the ban on carrying on private property open to the public and upholding the other carry restrictions has muddied the water a bit for both plaintiffs and defendants. It’s likely that plaintiffs will want to appeal the portion of the ruling upholding most of the bans, while the state might appeal the ruling on the “vampire rule.”
The three 4th Circuit judges hearing the case were Chief Judge Albert Diaz and Circuit Judges Roger L. Gregory and G. Steven Agee.
Ultimately, despite the setback, the court’s decision on the “vampire rule” could bolster the arguments of plaintiffs in the challenge to Hawaii’s similar restriction, which is currently being considered by the Supreme Court. In that case, Hawaii argues that, because it had restrictive gun laws while it was still a kingdom, it doesn’t need to abide by the Second Amendment as a state.
“We have traditions here that predate joining the Union, and they should reign supreme over the Constitution,” the state wrote in a court brief in the case Wolford v. Lopez.
Read the full article here
