The 4th Circuit has ruled that assault weapons that are disproportionate to the need for personal defense can be banned.
Second Amendment
Assault weapons that are ‘disproportionate to the need for self-defense’ can be banned, 4th Circuit says
August 7, 2024, 12:14 pm CDT
An en banc federal appeals court upheld Maryland’s ban on assault-style weapons in a 10-5 decision Tuesday. (Image from Shutterstock)
An en banc federal appeals court upheld Maryland’s ban on assault-style weapons in a 10-5 decision Tuesday.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Richmond, Virginia, said military-style weapons aren’t protected by the Second Amendment because they are “designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense.”
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote the majority opinion, joined by eight other justices. A tenth justice concurred in the result.
Publications with coverage include the Baltimore Sun, the Baltimore Banner, Reuters and the Associated Press. How Appealing linked the coverage and the August 6 decision.
The 4th Circuit upheld the Maryland Law in a previous 2017 decision. However, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a part of the appeals courts approach in a 2022 case. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen.
The Supreme Court’s June 2022 ruling in Bruen struck New York’s requirement that “proper cause” must be shown to receive a The Supreme Court said that gun regulations should be evaluated based on the Second Amendment and the nation’s history of firearms regulation. Its mandate is absolute and, applied here, unequivocal.” His dissent was joined by four other judges.
“The majority cherry-picks various regulations from the historical record and pigeonholes them into its preferred–yet implausible–reading of our nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation,” Richardson said.
Wilkinson responded that the dissent’s approach would be a blow to the government’s obligation to ensure safety. Under the dissent’s reasoning, “arms upon arms would be permitted in what can only be described as a stampede toward the disablement of our democracy in these most dangerous of times,” Wilkinson said.
Wilkinson is an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, while Richardson is an appointee of former President Donald Trump.
The 4th Circuit devoted much of its analysis to the modern dangers of assault weapons, said Michael I. Meyerson, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, in an interview with the Baltimore Sun.
“The majority spent a lot of time talking about something other than history,” Meyerson told the Baltimore Sun. Meyerson told the Baltimore Sun that “the majority spent a lot of time talking about something other than history.”
