NSSF Photo

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has announced they will seek Supreme Court review in Bianchi v. Wilkinson, SAF’s challenge to Maryland’s assault weapons ban, after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law.

 “Today’s decision from the 4th Circuit is unsurprising given their prior decision in Kolbe,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “We believe, much like in Kolbe, the court’s analysis is flawed and that the challenged law is unconstitutional. We will be filing a petition for certiorari at the Supreme Court, as this case presents an excellent vehicle for the Court to settle this debate once and for all.”  In the 65-page opinion, judges for the majority wrote: “The assault weapons at issue fall outside the ambit of protection offered by the Second Amendment because, in essence, they are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense.” Chief Judge Diaz drafted a concurring opinion, with five other judges joining. Judge Richardson drafted a dissenting opinion, with four other judges joining stating: “The Second Amendment is not a second-class right subject to the whimsical discretion of federal judges. Its mandate is absolute and, applied here, unequivocal…In holding otherwise, the majority grants states historically unprecedented leeway to trammel the constitutional liberties of their citizens.” Joining SAF in the case are the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Field Traders, LLC., the Firearms Policy Coalition, and three private citizens, David Snope, Micah Schaefer and Dominic Bianchi, for whom the case is named. “The court relied heavily on the distinction between ‘military style’ arms and those appropriate for self-defense use,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This distinction runs completely contrary to the mandates of Heller and Bruen, and now sets the stage for another petition for SCOTUS review of the case.”

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

30 COMMENTS

  1. They should take them to SCOTUS. Some of the justices were wanting a case for this, well, here it is.

    • Note for above:

      (If anyone had the question) In the comments at the link above Mark N. writes:

      “Nothing got stayed. Just some of the defendants were dismissed from the case by the trial court on jurisdictional grounds (the nature of which grounds are not explained by the short article here).”

  4. Rest assured if cackles and tampon tim cook the books and are installed like joe there is going to be a stampede to grab ARs, AKs, etc. That bargain Anderson carbine for $399 can become $2000. There’s always sleazebags circling the 2A like Vultures waiting to feast on the carcus. Don’t want to see it happen? Then do your part outside this forum to support TRUMP/VANCE 2024.
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=uKulruNnoDs&feature=shared

  5. Blah blah blah…..
    Why hasn’t any other unconstitutional ban been taken to SCOTUS by SAF ?
    The folks that live inside the People’s Republic of Illinoistan and Commiefornia have been suffering long enough but Illinoistan just got denied by SCOTUS because “… it has to go thru the system…”.
    Not that I’m running out of patience with our legal system, but it’s been gamed for decades by the pearl clutchers. They use our tax money against us while denying our civil rights.
    Bovine feces is still feces no matter how much perfume ya put on it. Including putting lipstick on the actual bovine. (I luv a good mixed metaphor !)

    • Pretty simple: the Supreme Court will not grant certiorari until there is a final judgment after trial and after a certain appeal to the 7th Circuit is finally determined. The Supremes have already declined to take appeals from the denial of preliminary injunctions (i.e. injunctions pending trail), so don’t expect these cases to make it upstairs for several years. And if the Court takes Maryland and reverses, that ruling will probably be binding on the court is Illinois, California, and the others who have passed such bans (I’ve lost track).

      • Usually save that for after the first few excuses especially when there isn’t a history of disingenuous or unproductive nonsense in their postings 😉 but yeah that is a bit of a measuring stick as well.

        • Life member of GAO, donate to SAF annually, life member of GSL (Illinois’ largest and best organized 2A group).
          NRA-ILA on hold until they prove they are responsible again.
          I also volunteer freely and often to 2A community events, like helping out a new chapter of USPSA get started, and I’m not a member.

          You do you, I’ll do me.

          • Around what I figured based on previous postings. Patience can be a stone bitch when you know your right and there is no method to move things along though

    • Mix of standing and building the case. With that said we did undo decades of nonsense over.the last 20 odd years and the rate at which we are peeling everything back is accelerating. The problem is we were essentially treading water while slowly sinking for a century and really only just starting to swim back to shore. So unless you want to see Somalia redux it will be a bit of watching paint dry in court while pushing for repeal of retarded laws and passing further protections anywhere the legislative branch is respectful of that part of the constitution. In short not going to get wrapped up in one season let alone an episode or two.

    • Ya know my eyes glaze over when I hear other states are getting “rights” but not ILLANNOY. From the miniscule #’s of gat owner’s who told the state po-leece what they had(duh)there’s a chit ton of semiautomatics in ILLANNOY. And it ain’t just gangbangers in Chiraq. Before January 10,2023 there was a “tolerable” set of laws. Now the gun bs& evil Dim laws (especially taxes) are causing many thousands to leave. Fat boy in Springfield wasn’t photogenic or gentile enough to be president of vice🙄

  7. Not going to happen. The law abiding citizens of California have been waiting since 1989 for SCOTUS to hear their semi-auto “assault rifle” ban. JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED!

  10. “The court relied heavily on the distinction between ‘military style’ arms and those appropriate for self-defense use.” — SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb

    And even that is problematic for two reasons:

    First of all, our military has used or is still using nearly all firearms that citizens keep and bear today. That includes the entire gambit of long guns from muzzleloading muskets, lever-action rifles and shotguns, pump-action rifles and shotguns, bolt-action rifles, semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, and even fully automatic rifles (and shotguns if there even is such a thing???). That previous list of long guns also includes all long guns with the arbitrary designation of “short” barrels (less than 16-inches for rifles and 18-inches for shotguns). Of course our military has used or is still using all manner of handguns–muzzleloading muskets, single-action revolvers, double-action revolvers, semi-auto pistols, and probably even fully automatic pistols. (I have to believe that military members even used Derringers at some point.)

    Thus, if the 4th Circuit is going to claim that the Second Amendment does not protect our right to keep and bear “military” firearms, then we have no right to keep and bear ANY firearms since ALL firearms have been or currently are “military” firearms.

    The second problem with the 4th Circuit’s decision is that it directly contradicts the U.S. Supreme Court’s Miller decision in the 1930s where the Supremes clearly stated that the Second Amendment protects a citizen’s right to keep and bear firearms which are useful to the militia and the military.

    The 4th Circuit’s decision in this case is so egregious and gross as to constitute a felony crime in my opinion.

  11. MAJOR BREAKING 2A NEWS: FEDERAL JUDGES CAUGHT INTENTIONALLY MANIPULATING 2A CASES.

    The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in its Bianchi decision offered some interesting insights into the process about how the ruling was decided. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DocPn4HeXIM

    • This goes beyond “scummy behavior”. What the 4th Circuit did is judicial misconduct in my opinion and the offending Judges deserve prison time since it contradicts clear U.S. Supreme Court decisions and denied people their ability to exercise a Constitutionally enumerated right for 11+ months.

    • So the 4th in December 2022 had a draft opinion 2-1 in favor of declaring the Maryland AWB unconstitutional but it was buried by a “pocket veto” where the dissenting judge refused to issue her dissent opinion.

      I hope Alito and Thomas catch wind of this and we see the Maryland AWB at SCOTUS early next session. There is NO reason for them to not grant CERT for this now as it has been decided en banc by the 4th.

  16. Justice Gorsuch already asked this question a while back: “What is the constitutional difference between a semi automatic firearm and a bolt action firearm?”

Comments are closed.