Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a petition for certiorari challenging Maryland’s “good and substantial reason” requirement for those who apply for a concealed carry permit.
Since Heller, which involved the “keeping” of a handgun within the home, most lower federal courts have been unwilling to give Second Amendment rights significant application outside the home. Unfortunately, most judges serving on the lower federal courts have exhibited a continuing visceral hostility to firearms, the Second Amendment, and the Heller decision.
Indeed, both the district court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in this case applied the very same judge-empowering, interest balancing tests that the Heller Court rejected. In doing so, both courts came to the conclusion that the right to “bear” arms outside the home may be infringed so long as the government meets a certain standard of judicial review.
On the contrary, our brief argued, Heller noted that laws which infringe the right of the People to keep and bear arms are unconstitutional per se, no matter how important or even compelling the government’s interests might seem for the infringement. Nothing in Heller indicated that Second Amendment rights are limited to the home, and the unambiguous text of the Second Amendment clearly protects not only the right to “keep” firearms at home, but also the right to “bear” firearms in public.