The rulings in Maryland and Oregon come amid a shifting legal landscape in the wake of a Supreme Court decision that has imposed new limits on gun regulation.

In the wake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that significantly limits what the government can do to restrict guns, states led by Democrats have scrambled to circumvent or test the limits of the ruling. A few have approved new gun restrictions. Oregon even passed a ballot initiative to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines.

But this week, supporters of the new gun measures suffered a pair of setbacks, underscoring the rippling effect of the court’s decision.

On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., ruled that a 10-year-old Maryland law related to licensing requirements for handguns was unconstitutional.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not the waiting period that’s the problem, it’s the permit to attempt to buy.

    There’s already a background check when you buy, these states were requiring a second background check before you buy. Pointless paperwork.

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      SCOTUS has held that permitting is fine with Bruen, though, as long as it doesn’t involve subjective “suitability” criteria, which is my point.

    • ryathal
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Maryland also required fingerprints, which is a huge hassle and will likely cause the law to stay invalidated. It costs money, and requires you to go to a jail or sheriffs office, which is only open from 9-4 with lunch blocked from 11:30-1:30.