The 4th Circuit Court just ruled the Maryland gun and magazine ban is unconstitutional, saying that strict scrutiny must be applied.
Chuck Michel’s law firm has a copy of the decision in the case of Kolbe v. Hogan.
The antigunners must be shitting themselves over this.
Effect on SAFE???
I cannot comment on pending litigation.
My totally unprofessional dilettante opinion is it cant hurt but I would not pop any champagne corks. SCOTUS denied cert on Highland Park, a very similar case to ours. It seemed to me after that, there was no real sense in us moving forward (just guessing – NYSRPA legal team – WAY smarter than me). As of right now this helps cause the court is more prone to give cert when there are conflicting rulings in the circuits. This may go back to the 4th “en banc” (review by all 15 judges, not just the 3), and all but 4 of them are Clinton / Obama appointees. Not good. SCOTUS does not want the case. Roberts and Kennedy have shifted left since being scolded for Citizens United (threatened is another hypothesis). They would like to rule against us but they cannot do it without shitting all over their OWN landmark precedent (Heller / McDonald), and the legacy of the Roberts Court going down in history as STUPID.
Also, looks like they did not strike it down but sent it back down to be reconsidered under strict scrutiny. What does that mean in the lower court? Not sure. The difference between intermediate and strict scrutiny standard is (I believe) an important vs. a compelling interest of the government (what is the metric for that? – LOL!). Can the lower court just say OK the public interest for safety is not just important but compelling?? This is an unexpected smile / ray of light, at least for now.
Interesting to read this opinion. He really put his finger on the heart of the matter in a note on p.33 where explains that the fault in Heller is that they neither precluded or prescribed a level of “means – end scrutiny”. I guess they figured that an absolute ban (on a class of firearm in the home) did not require defining a level of scrutiny? But this is also an outright ban on possession in the home of an entire class.? Also, Justices Thomas and Scalia did a great thing by issuing a dissent in Highland Park cause this Judge actually did reference it in his determination for strict scrutiny. BTW, surprisingly, I believe this Judge is a Clinton appointee.
This Judge wrote a BEAUTIFUL opinion. Really worth reading. Thank G-d there are still some smart people WITH INTEGRITY left. Diogenes finally found a guy. LOL.
Not to beat a dead horse here, but if you want to appreciate one of the last judges with REAL INTEGRITY, read just page 45 of JUDGE TRAXLER’S opinion!