While likely to be appealed, the thought of the 4th Circuit's decision on this prevailing makes me believe that there is hope.
The nuts and bolts of it are this:
Most, if not all, gun control laws on the books in blue states are typically subject only to intermediate (or lesser) scrutiny. States with such laws only have to express a "for the public good" rationale in order to justify these laws.
What the 4th Circuit of appeals has done is make Maryland's law subject to strict scrutiny, whereby the states must not only define exactly what it is they're trying to accomplish, but also explain how the law in question actually achieves the stated goal.
Up to this point, virtually all the other enumerated rights have been subject to strict scrutiny, with the 2nd amendment being the conspicuous exception. This ruling, if it stands, changes that in a major way.
In other words, the usual emotional smoke screens offered as justification will no longer be adequate when these unconstitutional laws are challenged.
"What part of 'Shall not be infringed' don't you understand?"
The nuts and bolts of it are this:
Most, if not all, gun control laws on the books in blue states are typically subject only to intermediate (or lesser) scrutiny. States with such laws only have to express a "for the public good" rationale in order to justify these laws.
What the 4th Circuit of appeals has done is make Maryland's law subject to strict scrutiny, whereby the states must not only define exactly what it is they're trying to accomplish, but also explain how the law in question actually achieves the stated goal.
Up to this point, virtually all the other enumerated rights have been subject to strict scrutiny, with the 2nd amendment being the conspicuous exception. This ruling, if it stands, changes that in a major way.
In other words, the usual emotional smoke screens offered as justification will no longer be adequate when these unconstitutional laws are challenged.
"What part of 'Shall not be infringed' don't you understand?"
Comment