(TheLastPatriotNews.com) – In outrageous news to the defenders of Second Amendment rights, a federal appeals court has upheld Maryland’s ban on some semiautomatic weapons, a notable victory for “gun control” leftists.
On Tuesday, the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Maryland’s prohibition on certain semiautomatic firearms, The Hill reports.
The decision, made by a 10-5 majority of the full appellate court, concluded that the Maryland statute is consistent with the US Supreme Court’s recent broadening of gun rights.
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, writing for the majority, articulated the court’s rationale.
“We decline to wield the Constitution to declare that military-style armaments which have become primary instruments of mass killing and terrorist attacks in the United States are beyond the reach of our nation’s democratic processes,” he wrote.
A plaintiff involved in the case has declared intentions to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court.
The legislation in question was enacted in 2013, following the tragic mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School that resulted in the deaths of 20 children and six adults.
This law criminalizes the possession or sale of assault weapons, encompassing a broad array of firearms such as the AR-15, AK-47, and semiautomatic rifles that accommodate high-capacity magazines, with penalties including up to three years of imprisonment for violations.
The statute’s challengers include three Maryland citizens, three gun rights organizations, and a local firearms dealer, all of whom argue that the law infringes upon their constitutional rights.
Initially upheld by the 4th Circuit, the Supreme Court remanded the case for reevaluation in light of a recent decision that expanded Second Amendment protections, which dictates that gun control laws must align with the historical tradition of firearm regulation in the U.S. to be deemed constitutional.
Despite this heightened scrutiny, Wilkinson, appointed by former President Reagan, maintained that Maryland’s legislation aligns with constitutional standards.
He observed that the specific weapons targeted by the law are “military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense.”
“The Maryland law fits comfortably within our nation’s tradition of firearms regulation,” asserting that it effectively restricts highly dangerous weapons while still allowing for lawful self-defense,” he noted further.
The majority opinion was supported by eight other judges, all appointed by Democrat presidents, while another concurred with the constitutionality of the law but diverged in reasoning.
Conversely, the dissenting opinion, penned by Judge Julius Richardson, appointed by former President Trump, criticized the majority’s approach: “The majority disregards the Founders’ wisdom and replaces it with its own.”
The Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the appellants, expressed determination to challenge the decision at the Supreme Court level.
Copyright 2024, TheLastPatriotNews.com
