Not good, Maryland's Woollard v. Gallagher is over-turned


PDA






usmarine0352_2005
March 21, 2013, 02:24 PM
.


This isn't good. This was ruled on today. I guess the next step is SCOTUS?





http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-21/maryland-requirement-for-gun-carry-permits-upheld-by-court-1-.html




.
Maryland Requirement for Gun-Carry Permit Upheld by Court

By Tom Schoenberg & Andrew Zajac - Mar 21, 2013 12:11 PM CT




Maryland’s demand that a person who wants a permit to carry a gun outside the home show “good and substantial reason” for doing so was upheld by a U.S. appeals court as a constitutional public-safety measure.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, today reversed a lower-court judge, who had found that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense extends beyond the home and that the state’s standard for granting a carry permit infringed on that right.

“The state has demonstrated that the good-and-substantial- reason requirement is reasonably adapted to Maryland’s significant interests in protecting public safety and preventing crime,” U.S. Circuit Judge Robert King wrote in the 33-page opinion.

The potential of the case to extend the Second Amendment right of gun possession to carrying firearms in public drew 45 interest groups and states to file briefs arguing their positions to the court. The judges opted not to address the question directly,saying Maryland’s law would withstand constitutional scrutiny even if the Second Amendment does protect a right to carry a gun outside the home.

“It’s not much of a right if the police can demand that you satisfy their vision of a ’good and substantial reason’ to exercise it,” Alan Gura, an attorney for the plaintiffs said in a statement released by the Second Amendment Foundation. “The next step is for courts to tell Americans that they need a ’good and substantial reason’ to speak, worship or be secure from unreasonable searches.”

The case is Woollard v. Gallagher, 12-1437, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (Richmond).

To contact the reporters on this story: Tom Schoenberg in Washington at tschoenberg@bloomberg.net; Andrew Zajac in Washington at azajac@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net.
.
.

If you enjoyed reading about "Not good, Maryland's Woollard v. Gallagher is over-turned" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ATBackPackin
March 21, 2013, 02:42 PM
So now the Constitution should read, "The right of the people to keep certain arms we deem necessary"?

:fire:

usmarine0352_2005
March 21, 2013, 02:49 PM
.
Or just, "....the right of the people to keep arms shall not be infringed."



Just take out the "bear" part.
.

dmckean44
March 21, 2013, 02:49 PM
As a California resident, I wanted this to go to SCOTUS anyway.

armoredman
March 21, 2013, 02:53 PM
According to them, the 2A read, "The ability of the people to keep and bear arms shall be determined on a case by case basis according to the needs of the State."

Frank Ettin
March 21, 2013, 02:55 PM
An expected result. The whole point has been to get the question to SCOTUS.

usmarine0352_2005
March 21, 2013, 03:48 PM
.

I expect they will appeal it to SCOTUS immediately so when do you think this might be decided if they will hear it?
.

Frank Ettin
March 21, 2013, 03:54 PM
I expect they will appeal it to SCOTUS immediately so when do you think this might be decided if they will hear it?Sorry, my crystal ball is in the shop.

Seriously, it's just not the sort of thing that can be predicted with any confidence. But these things do take time.

pseudonymity
March 21, 2013, 05:24 PM
I read it this morning, and it seems that there is quite a bit of overlap with Kachalsky where the SAF has already petitioned SCOTUS for certiorari. If cert is granted for Kachalsky, would it even be needed for Woolard?

Cosmoline
March 21, 2013, 05:32 PM
Sometimes they toss them in the same pot for review.

usmarine0352_2005
March 21, 2013, 05:53 PM
.

There are 2 dissenting circuits on this issue no? And that makes it more likely to get to SCOTUS right?
.

usmarine0352_2005
March 21, 2013, 06:38 PM
.

Looks like it has to be appealed to again before it could go to SCOTUS. Ugh.
.

USAF_Vet
March 21, 2013, 11:21 PM
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Void where prohibited, some restrictions apply, must be 18 years old to qualify, government employees and their family members exempt from all restrictions."

sonick808
March 21, 2013, 11:52 PM
that is completely the opposite of what Heller says. SCOTUS can only overrule that opinion, or succumb to ideology in a 5-4 harbinger of end times. sure hope it's the former

Phatty
March 22, 2013, 10:26 AM
An expected result. The whole point has been to get the question to SCOTUS.
There was never any doubt when two of the three judges ruling on the case were appointed by Obama and the third judge was appointed by Clinton.

627PCFan
March 22, 2013, 10:54 AM
Irritating and frustrating from an ex-MD'er.
While I originally was against it, I hope Maryland Shall Issue organizes a long gun OC event (announced) in Annapolis.

Arbo
March 22, 2013, 05:15 PM
It should go to the SCOTUS next. How can it in any way be constitutional for a government to determine if it's ok for you to defend yourself? This is just so wrong.

Twmaster
March 22, 2013, 05:26 PM
And the wheel keeps spinning....

This is indeed sad news. As a former Marylander I feel for those folks trapped behind enemy lines in the Un-Free State.

I moved out of MD because of this sort of political silliness and draconian gun laws.

With the two current, and opposing, appeals court rulings this is going to get interesting or ugly.

mgkdrgn
March 23, 2013, 07:56 PM
I warned you to "wait for the Fat Lady to sing." The state of MD will fight this down to the last taxpayer dollar and beyond ...

Arbo
March 23, 2013, 08:27 PM
From a friend in MD:

2A Supporters packed the State House AGAIN today. No rally. No chanting. Just a silent protest as the House meets to vote on NON-GUN-RELATED bills. Yup...house full of good people when they AREN'T voting on gun legislation.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=112660

Scroll through and check out the pics. I'm actually proud of Maryland today. At the same time, not so proud of some of the Delegates. This is a good thread.

tyeo098
March 23, 2013, 11:20 PM
Yeah... non members cant see attachments.

Dem Merrylanders need to learn to use photobucket xD

If you enjoyed reading about "Not good, Maryland's Woollard v. Gallagher is over-turned" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!