Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

elleng

(130,714 posts)
10. Yes.
Thu Nov 9, 2017, 01:16 AM
Nov 2017

'"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.'

HOWEVER, "Judge William Traxler issued a dissent. By concluding the Second Amendment doesn't even apply, Traxler wrote, the majority "has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms." He also wrote that the court did not apply a strict enough review on the constitutionality of the law.

"For a law-abiding citizen who, for whatever reason, chooses to protect his home with a semi-automatic rifle instead of a semi-automatic handgun, Maryland's law clearly imposes a significant burden on the exercise of the right to arm oneself at home, and it should at least be subject to strict scrutiny review before it is allowed to stand," Traxler wrote.'

I look forward to reading this opinion Gothmog Nov 2017 #1
Feb 21 2017 decision Sneederbunk Nov 2017 #7
Where did you get your Constitutional Law Degree? Nt flamin lib Nov 2017 #8
Yes. elleng Nov 2017 #10
YES!! whathehell Nov 2017 #2
Awesome! Phoenix61 Nov 2017 #3
THIS IS HUGE RandomAccess Nov 2017 #4
The NRA can't buy the courts RainCaster Nov 2017 #5
Yes, a big concern. elleng Nov 2017 #6
This is in line with other SCOTUS actions flamin lib Nov 2017 #9
Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Maryland»Assault Weapons Not Prote...»Reply #10