Maryland’s governor has signed into law a new law to respond to a Supreme Court ruling that has changed the gun control battle in the United States.
The series of bills signed into law by Governor Wes Moore on Tuesday includes a measure to prevent anyone from carrying a concealed handgun in designated areas, such as schools and hospitals.
But it removes language that said a person must demonstrate “good and substantial cause” to carry a concealed firearm outdoors – language that could be challenged under a recent Supreme Court ruling.
Maryland’s state law is the most recent response to last June’s Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, a case that directly challenged a New York state law requiring gun owners to prove they had a special need to carry a firearm in public.
The court ultimately ruled New York’s law unconstitutional, saying the right to bear a gun extends beyond the home. The ruling has since been used to curtail other gun control measures in the US.
“Gun violence is tearing apart the fabric of our communities, not just through mass shootings, but through shootings that happen far too often in each of our communities,” Moore, a Democrat, said at Tuesday’s signing ceremony.
“I am grateful to Governor Wes Moore for understanding the importance of this bill and for ensuring we use all available resources and options to ensure the safety of our fellow Marylanders.” #HB824 #weapon safety pic.twitter.com/4Riy8v4zOx
— The Baltimore City State Attorney’s Office (@BaltimoreSAO) May 16, 2023
“In Maryland, we refuse to say that these problems are too big or too heavy,” Moore added. “We will act, which is exactly what today represents.”
Much like legislation passed by New York State in the wake of the Bruen ruling, Maryland’s law seeks to carve out “sensitive areas” where carrying guns can still be banned.
One of the bills signed into law by the governor bans most people from carrying, carrying or transporting a concealed weapon in an “area for children or vulnerable adults,” such as a school or healthcare facility.
It also restricts the carrying of a firearm in a “government or public infrastructure area” or a “special purpose area”, which is defined as a stadium, museum, racetrack, casino or place licensed to sell alcohol or cannabis .
The new law, which goes into effect Oct. 1, includes certain exceptions for military, law enforcement and security guards.
As in New York state, pro-gun groups have pledged to challenge the measure in Maryland, with Mark Pennak, president of the pro-gun group Maryland Shall Issue, saying on Tuesday that a lawsuit has been drafted and “ready for usage”.
Lingering Effects of Bruen
Maryland is the most recent example of how the Bruen ruling has left states with stricter gun control measures racing to determine how to limit the concealed carrying of guns in public.
But the Bruen ruling has had wider implications for gun control in general, prompting an explosion of lawsuits to strike down decades-old gun control laws.
Under his majority opinion, Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas said carrying guns in some “sensitive places” could be banned if they could be shown to be analogous to locations considered sensitive in US history.
However, he also said that a government must justify any restrictions on the Second Amendment constitutional right to bear guns “by demonstrating that it is consistent with the nation’s historic tradition of firearms regulation.”
“Historical tradition,” Thomas explains, must be rooted in measures that were in effect when the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791 or even when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868. That amendment states that state laws cannot override federal laws.
The Bruen ruling was used just last week to scrap federal laws that blocked the sale of handguns to adults between the ages of 18 and 21. In his decision, Virginia federal judge Robert Payne said the age restriction was “not in keeping with the history and tradition of our country.”
Legal observers have said the Bruen ruling has sparked widespread confusion among judges, with different federal courts issuing conflicting rulings on the same issue. Prior to the Virginia ruling, a Louisiana federal judge had upheld the same federal age restriction.
Another ruling by a federal district judge in February ended a federal restriction that prohibited people under domestic violence protection orders from owning a gun. That, in turn, contradicted several other rulings on the case in federal courts.
The U.S. Department of Justice has petitioned the Supreme Court to hear that case.