Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to grant his office additional time to craft a response to a challenge targeting the state’s decade-old “assault weapons” ban.
Brown asked the Supreme Court Wednesday to grant a one-month extension for the state to file a response to the petition for certiorari filed by the plaintiffs in Bianchi v. Brown, citing being busy with “other assigned work,” according to court documents. A ruling from the court on the case could decide if “assault weapons” bans are constitutional.
The ban passed in 2013 after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting killed 20 children and six adults. The rifles covered by the ban include AK-pattern rifles, large anti-material rifles such as the Barrett .50 caliber M82 rifle and the ubiquitous AR-15 platform.
“Maryland has asked for another extension to respond to the cert petition in our lawsuit challenging Maryland’s ‘assault weapon ban.’ We are opposing the state’s request,” plaintiff and gun rights group Firearms Policy Coalition said on X Wednesday. “Maryland says it needs more time to respond to our cert petition (filed in August) because it has to respond to a different cert petition that was filed two weeks ago (which it hasn’t requested an extension for).”
The lawsuit was initially filed in 2020 with plaintiffs including the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as well as the FPC, according to court filings. They allege that Maryland banned commonly owned, semiautomatic firearms and deprive “millions of individuals” of their right to bear arms.
Gun rights advocates previously told the Daily Caller News Foundation that this case would likely result in “assault weapons” bans being ruled unconstitutional.
The case was appealed to the Supreme Court before in 2022 and in May 2024, with both being sent back down to lower courts, according to the FPC website. The most recent petition in August emphasizes how the case is more fleshed out from lower court rulings, and provides a good way for the Supreme Court to answer the question on “assault weapons” once and for all, according to the court filing.
“This case is a perfect vehicle for this Court to provide that guidance and correct the cabining of the Second Amendment right,” the plaintiffs said in the petition. “Unlike previous ‘arms ban’ cases that made similar errors and resulted in petitions for writs of certiorari post-Bruen, this case presents a final decision on the merits by a court of appeals (sitting en banc, no less) and it tees up these issues with respect to common semiautomatic rifles, including the paradigmatic AR-15 platform rifle, a firearm that is unquestionably in common use today.”
When asked for comment, the FPC directed the DCNF to a letter they filed with the Supreme Court Wednesday emphasizing how the extension would delay the consideration of the case well more than just one month.
“As the deadlines in this case currently stand and after the Respondents already received an initial 30-day extension to which we did not object, this case will be distributed on November 6, 2024, and will be considered by the Court for the first time at the November 22, 2024 conference,” the FPC said in the letter. “With just three conferences remaining before the end of the year, a 30-day extension would mean that this Court would not consider this case at conference until January 10, 2025.”
Brown’s office did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.
Editor’s note: This article has been updated.
(Featured Image Media Credit: Flickr/Tony Webster)
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
