logo
Supreme Court rejects Maryland AR-15 case, and interest groups respond

Supreme Court rejects Maryland AR-15 case, and interest groups respond

Yahooa day ago

BALTIMORE — It's not clear if the Supreme Court's decision to deny two gun cases, including a challenge to a Maryland ban on AR-15s, a semi-automatic rifle, will influence how other gun cases are determined. However, gun owners say the split-court's case rejection reflects skepticism from some justices that the ban is constitutional.
'Four members of the Court, including Justice Kavanaugh, have made clear that the Fourth Circuit incorrectly decided the case,' said Mark Pennak, president of Maryland Shall Issue, a group advocating for gun owner rights expansion. In his view, the court's rejection only 'temporarily' allows the ban to hold. 'Once the Court grants review of the issue, the decision in that case will be controlling precedent in MD and elsewhere. If plaintiffs win on this issue in that case, the Maryland law will fail as well,' he said.
The ban was enacted in response to the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary shooting in Newton, Connecticut, where 20 children and six school staff members were killed. The Maryland case, Snope v. Brown, was declined alongside a Rhode Island case which contested a ban on high-capacity gun magazines.
While Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas said they would hear the case, four of the nine Supreme Court justices must agree to hear a case. Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he expects the court will address the issue of AR-15 legality 'in the next Term or two.' Kavanaugh also said that AR–15s are legal in 41 of the 50 States, which makes Maryland's law, relatively, 'something of an outlier.'
Gun control advocates, including several Maryland elected officials, felt relieved at the high court's decision, saying that Marylanders are safer with the ban in place.
Daniel Webster, Bloomberg Professor of American Health in Violence Prevention at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that he views the court's rejection of the case favorably.
'I think it'll mean that assault weapon ban will stay in, and I think that that's generally a good thing in terms of public safety,' Webster said. 'And I think that that is a policy that most Marylanders support for sure.' He also said that there are other states where similar bans have been challenged on Second Amendment grounds, but most courts have supported the bans.
Maryland Congressman Glenn Ivey, a Democrat, posted on X, 'This decision sends a clear message: states can take bold action to protect their communities from gun violence. Marylanders shouldn't have to live in fear of weapons of war on our streets.' He also expressed his commitment to supporting 'common-sense gun laws that save lives and uphold our Constitution' in the future.
Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat, also voiced support for the Court's decision. 'Maryland passed its ban on military-style assault weapons after the Sandy Hook massacre,' he posted on X. 'SCOTUS should continue to allow lifesaving laws like Maryland's to remain in place.'
Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown, the defendant in Snope v. Brown, said in a statement that the Supreme Court's case rejection means the state's ban 'that prevents senseless and preventable deaths' will remain in effect. 'Our Office will continue to advocate for gun safety laws at the General Assembly and will defend Maryland's common-sense gun reforms in court. We will do whatever we can to protect Marylanders from this horrific violence,' the statement said.
________

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me.
Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me.

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me.

Despite declarations that something needs to be done about the declining birth rate in the United States, neither President Donald Trump nor the Republican Party has the desire to protect pregnant people. If they did, the Trump administration wouldn't have made its latest move to restrict abortion nationwide. On Tuesday, June 3, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services rescinded a Biden-era policy that directed hospitals to provide emergency abortions if it was needed to stabilize a pregnant patient. The guidance and communications on it apparently 'do not reflect the policy of this Administration.' I, like many people who support abortion rights, know what this will lead to. It means more pregnant people will die. Does that reflect the policy of the administration? The Biden policy was implemented in 2022, following the fall of Roe v. Wade, and argued that hospitals receiving Medicare funding had to comply with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The former administration argued that this included providing emergency abortions when they were needed to stabilize a patient, even in states that had severe abortion restrictions. Opinion: A brain dead pregnant Georgia woman is a horror story. It's Republicans' fault. This wasn't entirely a surprise. In 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas could ban virtually all abortions in the state, including abortions that would have occurred under the old EMTALA guidelines. Still, it's terrifying to see this crucial policy eliminated. It's already dangerous to be pregnant in the United States. Our maternal mortality rate is much higher than in other wealthy countries. Same with our infant mortality rate. This will only exacerbate these tragedies. In states with abortion bans, the risks are even greater. A study from the Gender Equity Policy Institute found that people living in states with abortion bans were twice as likely to die during or shortly after childbirth. This is also backed by anecdotal evidence, including the 2022 deaths of two women in Georgia after the state passed a six-week ban. A different study found that infant mortality rates increased in states with severe restrictions on abortion, including an increase in deaths due to congenital anomalies. The Trump administration does not care about what is medically necessary to save someone's life. They don't care about whether the children supposedly saved by rescinding this policy will grow up without their mother. They care about their perceived moral superiority. They care about controlling women. Why would anybody want to have a child under that Republican way of thinking? Opinion: We're worrying about the wrong thing. Low birth rate isn't the crisis: Child care is. I want to say I'm surprised that the Trump administration would allow women in need of emergency care to die. Yet this is clearly aligned with the Republican stance on abortion, just like it's aligned with the actions that the party has taken to make it harder for women to access necessary care. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Whether you like it or not, abortion is a necessary part of health care. It saves lives. Alexis McGill Johnson, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood, laid it out plainly. 'Women have died because they couldn't get the lifesaving abortion care they needed,' she said in a statement. 'The Trump administration is willing to let pregnant people die, and that is exactly what we can expect." Again, this is the administration that wants young women like me to have children and improve the country's birth rate. This is an administration that claims to care about women and children. I know I wouldn't want to have a child while Trump continues to make it unsafe to be pregnant and give birth. I hate that this is the reality. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter, @sara__pequeno You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump just made healthcare more dangerous for pregnant women | Opinion

Former Rep. David Jolly announces bid for Florida governor
Former Rep. David Jolly announces bid for Florida governor

Yahoo

time27 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Former Rep. David Jolly announces bid for Florida governor

TAMPA, Fla. (WFLA) — Former Rep. David Jolly announced Thursday that he is entering the Florida governor's race. Jolly previously represented Florida District 13 from 2014 to 2017 as a Republican. However, in the governor's race, Jolly will run as a Democratic candidate. 'Let's end the politics of division and return Florida to voters who simply want an economy that works, the best education system in the world, safe communities, and a government that stays out of their doctors' offices and family decisions,' Jolly said in a news release. 'This is a different type of issues-driven, results-focused campaign, and it will be driven not by anger and division but by optimism and solutions,' Jolly said. 'We are building a new coalition of Floridians who deeply care about their state and are desperate for real answers to real problems that are putting our quality of life at risk.' Jolly is the first Democrat to enter the Florida governor's race. U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds, Surfside Mayor Charles Burkett and State Sen. Jason Pizzo have already thrown their hats into the race. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Reaction pours in after Jolly announces run for governor
Reaction pours in after Jolly announces run for governor

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Reaction pours in after Jolly announces run for governor

TAMPA, Fla. (WFLA) – Former Rep. David Jolly has announced he's running for Florida governor. The Dunedin native served as a member of Congress as a Republican from 2014 to 2017. He left the party in 2018 and recently registered as a Democrat. 'Is it okay to change your mind? I think it should be. I think more politicians should change their mind. I think the question is when we see politicians who change values. My values have been the same,' Jolly said. One of Jolly's goals is to help make it easier for Floridians to be able to live and spend money in the Sunshine State. 'I'm running because I think we are in the midst of an affordability crisis,' Jolly said One of his ideas involves a plan, he said, that would reduce the amount families pay for property insurance. Florida budget talks extended, final plan still pending 'Florida needs a state catastrophic fund. If we remove hurricane coverage, natural disaster coverage from the private market, put it into a state catastrophic fund, we can reduce private property insurance, homeowners' insurance, by up to 60%,' Jolly said. There continues to be a push to expand access to abortion and legalize recreational marijuana. Despite both ballot measures failing to cross the 60% threshold needed to pass, Jolly said lawmakers in Tallahassee should've filed and enacted legislation to honor the majority of voters. Jolly's platform also includes a plan to reduce gun violence. 'We need comprehensive and universal background checks. We need to improve the Parkland package. My republican opponent right now wants to roll back the Parkland package,' Jolly said. In a statement, gubernatorial candidate and Rep. Byron Donalds, who's endorsed by President Donald Trump, said, in part: 'David Jolly is a failed politician, lobbyist, and MSNBC commentator. Soon, he'll be able to add failed Gubernatorial candidate to his resume.' Jolly is a strong critic of Trump. State Sen. Jason Pizzo, who is running under No Party Affiliation, said: 'Nice guy. No chance.' Jolly does not see a pathway to the governor's mansion for any candidate who runs as an Independent. New Florida law requires restaurants to reveal 'hidden' fees There continues to be speculation involving First Lady Casey DeSantis and Attorney John Morgan to enter the race. St. Pete College Political Science Professor Tara Newsom weighed in on Jolly's candidacy. 'David Jolly might be the right messenger with the right message for the Democratic Party. His message that Floridians are tired of the culture wars and that the next gubernatorial campaign isn't about the MAGA movement but about the affordability issues,' Newsom said. Jolly understands he has to reach across party lines to win. 'If David Jolly can make the case that he switched parties out of principle, not politics, that will resonate with those independent voters,' Newsom said. The Republican Gubernatorial Association called Jolly a flip-flopper over switching parties and likened him to Former Gov. and Rep. Charlie Crist. The Florida Democratic Party doesn't make endorsements ahead of the primary. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store