re: SCOTUS refuses to hear Challenge to Maryland ban on AR-15s

quote:

---

“This case primarily concerns Maryland’s ban on the AR–15, a semi-automatic rifle. Americans today possess an estimated 20 to 30 million AR–15s. And AR–15s are legal in 41 of the 50 States, meaning that the States such as Maryland that prohibit AR–15s are something of an outlier.

---

So, what other things are we going to allow some states to violate the Constitution on as long as most follow it on such issue? What's the tipping point number of states that would actually make it Constitutionaly violative?

What a bizarre construct!

quote:

---

Gorsuch is solid.

---

Unless the case is about transfags.

quote:

---

From what I gathered with what is happening, they are waiting on the numerous cases in the circuit courts to work their way through before taking it on and settling it.

---

Yes. They just used a selective quote and ignored the meat of what he said.

This is what you expect from your typical dishonest brokers who rely on rage bait, like Breitbart.

quote:

---

In short, under this Court’s precedents, the Fourth Circuit’s decision is questionable. Although the Court today denies certiorari, a denial of certiorari does not mean that the Court agrees with a lower-court decision or that the issue is not worthy of review. The AR–15 issue was recently decided by the First Circuit and is currently being considered by several other Courts of Appeals. See Capenv. Campbell, 134 F. 4th 660 (CA1 2025); see also, e.g., National Assn. for Gun Rights v. Lamont, 685 F. Supp. 3d 63 (Conn. 2023), appeal pending, No. 23–1162 (CA2); Association of N. J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. v. Platkin, 742 F. Supp. 3d 421 (NJ 2024), appeal pending, No. 24–2415 (CA3); Viramontes v. County of Cook, No. 1:21–cv–4595 (ND Ill., Mar. 1, 2024), appeal pending, No. 24–1437 (CA7); Miller v. Bonta, 699 F. Supp. 3d 956 (SD Cal. 2023), appeal pending, No. 23–2979 (CA9). Opinions from other Courts of Appeals should assist this Court’s ultimate decisionmaking on the AR–15 issue. Additional petitions for certiorari will likely be before this Court shortly and, in my view, this Court should and presumably will address the AR–15 issue soon, in the next Term or two

---

There was already a thread on this June 2

quote:

---

The problem with understanding what Justice Kavanaugh was saying is that the Breitbart writer fricked it all up and left out the parts that made the incongruent statement vs his vote make sense.

---

Yes.

Kav was basically signaling that the AR is going to fall under Heller, but there are multiple cases working through and once those appellate cases apply for writs, it will be taken up and he's telegraphing how he'll vote (to overturn the state bans).

But Breitbart can't make any money off that take.

In a sane world, it shouldn't be very difficult to display value compared to something as worthless as Breitbart

Come and take it

quote:

---

What’s the value in waiting?

---

Typically to create a wider ruling based on idiosyncratic underlying laws and to decide circuit splits, etc.

The Supreme Court only looks at the underlying record of the legal argument, so having multiple appellate decisions in conflict basically sets the stage for the briefing/argument before the Supreme Court. Also, you'll have multiple trial court records with differing testimony, evidence, etc.

Making a ruling based on more laws (with a similar nucleus) and more appellate decisions leads to more of a universal result.