A coalition of gun-rights groups has asked the Supreme Court to step in and block a Maryland law that bars even concealed-carry permit holders from carrying firearms at “sensitive places” such as state parks, museums and mass transit.
A lower appeals court upheld Maryland’s law, saying some public locations must be able to be off-limits for guns.
But the law’s opponents say the state has put so much of the public space out of bounds that it could undermine “a meaningful right to public carry at all.”
The Supreme Court has shied away from the sensitive locations debate, but the issue will have to be dealt with at some point.
Democrat-led states rushed to adopt sensitive-place laws after the justices in 2022 struck down other laws that had hindered those seeking concealed-carry permits.
That ruling, the Bruen decision, held that the only laws that could pass constitutional muster are ones that would have been countenanced by the nation’s founders, or alternatively those who crafted the 14th Amendment that applied most of the Bill of Rights against the states.
The gun-rights groups said the heart of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms is personal protection. In their petition to the Supreme Court, they said states can abridge that right in locations only when the state itself provides armed guards and screening — such as a courthouse.
The groups said the wide range of places Maryland bans guns makes it a good chance for the high court to settle matters.
“By labeling essentially all areas open to the public ‘sensitive places,’ municipalities have attempted to completely ban the possession and carry of firearms in public all over again,” said Adam Kraut, executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation. “We are hopeful presenting this case to the Supreme Court provides an attractive opportunity for the Court to once and for all clarify what places are, and are not, sufficiently ‘sensitive’ to justify extinguishing peoples’ rights.”
The Bruen ruling called into question all three parts of gun control laws: People whose possession can be limited, the types of weapons that can be limited, and what locations can be put out of bounds.
Cases dealing with all of those have been winding their way through the lower courts.
The high court last year declined to hear a case challenging Maryland’s ban on some semiautomatic rifles, including the popular AR-15.
Gun-rights groups challenged Maryland’s sensitive places law as it applied to mass transit, public demonstrations, state parks and forests, health care facilities, “places of amusement” such as stadiums and amusement parks, schools, government buildings and bars and restaurants where alcohol is served.
