Supreme Court Turns Away Two Firearms-Related Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal challenging Delaware’s ban on assault-style rifles and large-capacity ammunition magazines, as well as a case regarding Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements.

By doing so, the Court avoided addressing two significant cases involving the contentious issue of gun rights.

The justices turned away an appeal from a group of gun enthusiasts and firearm advocacy organizations, who sought to block Delaware’s ban on “assault weapons” and magazines capable of holding more than 17 rounds, following a lower court’s decision not to issue a preliminary injunction.

Reuters noted that such weapons have been used in several mass shootings in the U.S., but according to FBI crime states, the vast majority of gun-related homicides are committed with handguns.

The justices also declined to hear an appeal from the gun rights group Maryland Shall Issue and other plaintiffs, who were challenging a lower court’s ruling that upheld the state’s licensing law as consistent with the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear weapons.

While the justices declined to hear these two cases, the court did not take action on two separate appeals challenging Maryland’s ban on assault weapons and one in Rhode Island regarding large-capacity ammunition magazines.

With its 6-3 conservative majority, the Supreme Court has consistently adopted an originalist interpretation of gun rights in significant rulings dating back to 2008.

Delaware’s gun safety laws, enacted in 2022, ban several semi-automatic “assault” rifles, including the AR-15 and AK-47, but allow individuals who owned these weapons before the law’s passage to retain them under specific conditions. The law also prohibits large-capacity magazines, affecting devices owned before its enactment.

The challengers in the case include state residents attempting to purchase the banned firearms or magazines, a firearms dealer, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and the Second Amendment Foundation.

They have said that the lower courts wrongly rejected their argument that a “deprivation of Second Amendment rights necessarily constitutes an irreparable injury.” A federal judge denied the plaintiffs’ request for an injunction in 2023. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Philadelphia, upheld that decision in 2024.

That 3rd Circuit questioned the plaintiffs’ contention that an injunction is essentially required in the case. “Preliminary injunctions are not automatic,” the 3rd Circuit ruled.

“Rather, tradition and precedent have long reserved them for extraordinary situations. We see nothing extraordinary here,” the court added.

Maryland’s 2013 law mandates that most residents obtain a qualification license before purchasing a handgun. This process requires applicants to be fingerprinted, complete training, and undergo background checks.

The challengers argue that the process is too burdensome and that the requirement, which “can take a month or longer” to complete, discourages people from exercising their Second Amendment rights. Maryland, however, asserts that the fingerprinting and safety course requirements provide “significant public safety benefits.” The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Richmond, Virginia, ruled in favor of the state.

In October, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case concerning the legality of a 2022 federal regulation introduced by the Biden administration to target “ghost guns”—untraceable firearms that have been increasingly used in crimes. A decision is expected by the end of June.

On March 4, the justices are scheduled to hear arguments in another gun-related case, in which U.S. gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson and firearms wholesaler Interstate Arms are seeking to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Mexico. The lawsuit accuses them of contributing to the illegal trafficking of firearms to Mexican drug cartels.

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that a federal ban on “bump stock” devices, which allow semiautomatic weapons to fire at a rate similar to machine guns, was unlawful. The justices have also struck down significant gun restrictions in landmark cases in 2008, 2010, and 2022, Reuters noted.