[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: SAF MOVES FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN MD CARRY CASE SAF MOVES FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN MD CARRY CASE Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a federal challenge of Maryland’s concealed carry law, known as “SB1,” have filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The case is known as Novotny v. Moore. The request for preliminary injunction asks the federal court to restrain “defendants, and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in concert or participation with them who receive notice of the injunction” from enforcing the prohibition on carry in museums, health care facilities and locations licensed to sell or dispense alcohol for on-site consumption, along with public transit and state forest lands. SAF is joined in this case by Maryland Shall Issue, the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, all of whom possess “wear and carry permits,” including Susan Burke of Reisterstown, Esther Rossberg of Baltimore, and Katherine Novotny of Aberdeen, for whom the lawsuit is named. They are represented by attorneys David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C., Mark W. Pennak at Maryland Shall Issue in Baltimore. Defendants are Gov. Wesley Moore, Harford County State’s Attorney Alison M. Healey, Baltimore County State’s Attorney Scott D. Schellenberger, Baltimore City State’s Attorney Ivan J. Bates, Frederick County State’s Attorney J. Charles Smith III, Maryland State Police Supt. Col. Roland L. Butler, Jr., Transportation Secretary Paul J. Wiedefeld and Natural Resources Secretary Joshua Kurtz, in their official capacities. “We filed this motion to stop enforcement of this unconstitutional law while the issue is being litigated,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “There are no established, representative historical analogues for the carry prohibitions included in SB1. The practical effect of SB1 is the prohibition of carry in places where the public has a right to be. Generally barring carry in public is incompatible with the Second Amendment and is an affront to the Supreme Court’s directive in Bruen.” “SB1 is an affront to the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruenlast June,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Maryland lawmakers have stubbornly doubled down in their effort to blatantly slide around the new guidelines set down in the Bruen ruling. The new restrictions make it nearly impossible to legally carry firearms for personal protection.” Poster Comment: Give them an inch and they take a mile. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|
||