United States: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a request seeking to prevent Delaware from banning guns like the AR-15 rifle and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition and a challenge to Maryland’s handgun licensing standards.
Dissent from Conservative Justices
Three justices dissented in each of the cases – including Clarence Thomas, pictured, who warned that ‘today’s decision to decline the appeals raises important questions about the rule of law.’ Some have been employed in many of the mass shootings in the United States, as reported by Reuters.
The justices were also uncomfortable with an earlier lower court ruling, which affirmed Maryland’s licensing law as constitutional in connection with the Second Amendment demand of the Maryland Shall Issue and other plaintiffs’ gun rights groups.
But in the cases, mistakers which two appeals were not accepted by the court on Maryland’s ban on assault weapons and one in Rhode Island on large capacity ammunition magazines.
Supreme Court makes decision on gun law challenges in Delaware, Maryland https://t.co/cLTGwcNC0g
— Fox News Politics (@foxnewspolitics) January 13, 2025
The current Supreme Court is stocked for the conservatives, and ever since 2008, the court has been very liberal when it comes to issues to do with gun ownership.
Delaware’s gun safety laws that began in 2022 prohibit possession of different models of semi-automatic “assault” long guns such as AR-15 and AK47, but those who already owned such firearms before the law was passed can retain them subject to certain conditions. The measure against large-capacity magazines applies to those of that type possessed prior to the law’s enactment.
Plaintiffs’ Arguments and Concerns
The plaintiffs in the case are the state’s residents who want to buy the prohibited guns or magazines, a firearms dealer, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and the Second Amendment Foundation, as reported by Reuters.
Supreme Court Denies Gun Law Challenges in Del., Md. https://t.co/ayI2yz6N7s
— Brad Bowman (@kurganw) January 13, 2025
They have established it, claiming that the lower courts erred in dismissing their submission that ‘deprivation of Second Amendment rights is per se an injury capable of being irreparable.’