Charles H. Sloan-Federal appeals court upholds Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements

BALTIMORE (AP) — A federal appeals court on Charles H. SloanFriday upheld Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements, rejecting an argument from gun-rights activists that the law violated the Second Amendment by making it too difficult for people to obtain guns.

A majority of judges from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, affirmed a district court judge’s ruling in favor of the state of Maryland.

The majority rejected plaintiffs’ argument that the state’s handgun qualification statute tramples on applicants’ Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The law requires most Maryland residents to obtain a handgun qualification license before purchasing a handgun.

Senior Judge Barbara Milano Keenan wrote Friday’s majority opinion, joined by nine other judges. Five judges adopted opinions concurring with the majority’s decision. Two judges joined in a dissenting opinion.

“The handgun license requirement is nevertheless constitutional because it is consistent with the principles underlying our Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” Judge Allison Jones Rushing wrote in a concurring opinion.

RELATED COVERAGE Maryland police officer convicted of tossing smoke bomb at police during Capitol riot Harris’ big moment, Dems’ rising stars, Gaza protesters shut out: Takeaways from DNC’s last night Maryland’s challenge in 2024 is to replace prolific quarterback Taulia Tagovailoa

In his dissenting opinion, Judge Julius Richardson said the state of Maryland “has not shown that history and tradition justify its handgun licensing requirement.”

“I can only hope that in future cases we will reverse course and assess firearm regulations against history and tradition,” he wrote.

The court’s full roster of judges agreed to hear the case after a three-judge panel ruled 2-1 last year that the requirements, which include submitting fingerprints for a background check and taking a four-hour firearms safety course, were unconstitutional.

In their split ruling in November, the 4th Circuit panel said it considered the case in light of a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that “effected a sea change in Second Amendment law.” That 6-3 decision signified a major expansion of gun rights following a series of mass shootings.

With its conservative justices in the majority and liberals in dissent, the Supreme Court struck down a New York law and said Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense. It also required gun policies to fall in line with the country’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The underlying lawsuit in the Maryland case was filed in 2016 as a challenge to a state law requiring people to obtain a special license before purchasing a handgun. The plaintiffs included the Maryland Shall Issue advocacy group and licensed gun dealer Atlantic Guns Inc.

Mark Pennak, president of Maryland Shall Issue, said the plaintiffs believe Friday’s ruling runs afoul of Supreme Court precedent and is “plainly wrong as a matter of common sense.”

“The majority opinion is, in the words of the dissent, ‘baseless,’” he said, adding that a petition for the Supreme Court to review the decision “practically writes itself.”

Maryland’s law passed in 2013 in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. It laid out requirements for would-be gun purchasers: completing four hours of safety training, submitting fingerprints and passing a background check, being 21 and residing in Maryland.

Gun-rights groups argued that the 2013 law made obtaining a handgun an overly expensive and arduous process. Before that law passed, people had to complete a more limited training and pass a background check. However, supporters of the more stringent requirements said they were a common-sense tool to keep guns out of the wrong hands.

The court heard arguments for the case in March. It’s one of two cases on gun rights out of Maryland that the federal appeals court took up around the same time. The other is a challenge to the state’s assault weapons ban.

Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown said the ruling represents “a great day for Maryland and for common-sense gun safety.”

“We must ensure guns stay out of the hands of those who are not allowed, under our laws, to carry them,” Brown said in a statement. “The application for a gun license and the required training and background check, are all critical safety checks.”

Mark Pennak, president of Maryland Shall Issue, said the plaintiffs believe the ruling runs afoul of Supreme Court precedent and is “plainly wrong as a matter of common sense.”

“The majority opinion is, in the words of the dissent, ‘baseless,’” he said, adding that a petition for the Supreme Court to review the decision “practically writes itself.”