A U.S. District Court judge in Maryland has granted in part a motion for a preliminary injunction in two cases—including one involving the Second Amendment Foundation—challenging Maryland’s “sensitive places” law, which is supposed to take effect Sunday.
The case, known as Novotny v. Moore, was filed earlier this year against the law, which places broad restrictions on where a legally-licensed private citizen may carry a firearm for personal protection. The decision by Judge George L. Russell, III consolidates the Novotny case with another action known as Kipke v. Moore.
Under the judge’s order, Maryland is enjoined from enforcing laws restricting the carrying of firearms in locations selling alcohol, private buildings or property without the owner’s consent, and within 1,000 feet of a public demonstration. However, he left intact the prohibitions on carry in health care facilities, school grounds, government buildings, museums, state parks and state forests, casinos, mass transit facilities, stadiums, racetracks, and amusement parks.
“This is certainly a good sign from the court,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “We look forward to pursuing this case to a favorable conclusion.”
“We’re encouraged by Judge Russell’s order,” added SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Maryland is one of a handful of states that have adopted new statutes designed specifically to get around the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the 2022 Bruen case, by spreading a very wide blanket over areas where lawful concealed carry is prohibited. This is a signal that sort of legislative waltzing is in trouble.”
SAF is joined in the 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, and Matthew Larosiere from Lake Worth, Fla.
Another half assed decision by a judge. ” Shall not be infringed ” means any law that a government or a judge that puts limits or restrictions on our Second Amendment rights is unconstitutional and unenforceable.
And yet they still exist. Why? Because the citizenry allow the tyranny to continue…Unabated. if the 2nd Amendment to ‘So’ clear in it’s intent. Why hasn’t the citizenry done something about it. The ‘Founding Patriots’ would be ashamed to see how their sacrifices in the name of Freedom and Liberty, have been squandered away.
An Army of Two doesn’t last to long, that’s the problem.
Only because the rest are to cowardly to fight. Unlike the Founding Patriots at Lexington and Concord. That took on the strongest army on earth and kicked their asses all the way back to Boston. They were not trained soldiers. Just ordinary men. Men who were tired of a tyrannical regime attempting to take their Freedom and Liberty.
“Only because the rest are too cowardly to fight.”
I disagree with your statement for the most part. The correct word is more-likely “comfortable”, as in: “Too comfortable to fight.”
I have relatives living in upper end condos overlooking Lake Michigan in Chicago proper who never have seen or experienced any of the violence happening mere blocks from where they live. We talked about it this summer- doesn’t affect them, so what’s the big deal? They are very comfortable in their upper crust digs.
Another word that might also fit is “smart”, as in “Too smart to fight”.
In those blue states where people are fleeing the progressive nonsense, there is no one in the judicial system, or law enforcement, for that matter, who will support a citizen defending self, loved ones, acquaintances, or property. Stop even a well-known thug from mugging, robbing, carjacking- you name it and the defender is more likely to be charged than the aggressor. Either way, the law-abiding loses, so the smart ones choose to get out with what they still have, while they have it.
There are many other words that would fit as well, depending on the locale and situation. Personally, I’d be hesitant to paint masses of decent people as “cowards”, that is, unless the accuser has spent some real time doing what he/she/it claims others are too cowardly to do.
@ Craig in Iowa. Seems you have a bit of a guilty conscience.
“ …unless the accuser has spent some real time doing what he/she/it claims others are too cowardly to do“
Oh, what a dagger in the heart of every keyboard commando.
MINOR49er, Speaking of “keyboard commandos”. Somehow I don’t think you could pass the entry exam.
“Because the citizenry allow the tyranny to continue…Unabated”
Because the citizens realize that every right has responsibilities and limitations.
There are exceptions to every right in the BoR, as an example the first amendment has limitations upon libel and slander or false statements, the fourth amendment has clearly recognized limitations and exceptions such as the right to search a person’s vehicle.
Even the most conservative justices on the Supreme Court realize that every right under the constitution has limitations:
“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited,” Scalia wrote as he laid out certain exceptions. History demonstrates, Scalia said, “the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
Reasonable people understand these limitations imposed by a civil society.
MINOR49er. Oh, please. you Leftists are all about “limitations” (read control). None of the “limitations” you Leftists want to impose are reasonable or intelligent. You see, MINOR, criminals don’t follow your “limitations”. All you are doing is creating a number of target rich environments.
Catering to a scheme that somehow makes those with a permit special provides standing for a state ran scheme that takes a right from the citizenry and sells it back to them.
On the behalf of every citizen whose lives apparently do not matter equally Does Mr. Gottlieb expose the scheme in court? No and Hell No.
Thats why i waited for permitless carry. Didn’t see me asking for a permission slip to give me a right that i already own.
So, lemme see…
NY attempts to restrict carry by way of “sensitive places” legislation, gets slapped down by a federal judge.
MD attempts to restrict carry by way of “sensitive places” legislation, gets slapped down by a federal judge.
CA sees this, passes the same type of law, thinking things are different this time, because Newsom’s too arrogant to read the USC and avoid being slapped down.
BTW, in only a few months it will already be time to file for renewal of my CCW (they’re good for only two years here instead of the common five years elsewhere in Free America). The bevy of gun control laws Newsom just signed include numerous challenges for a renewal, plus LASD has Sheriff Luna (anti-CCW) instead of Villanueva who was Sheriff when I originally applied. I’m instructed to apply 90 days before the expiration date of my current permit, but it took 12 months to get it, and the few people I know who also finally got theirs waited 14-15 months. So when I apply for renewal, the 90 days pass by, and my permit “expires” without any word from LASD even though their website used to say their policy is to handle all applications within 90 days… do I continue to carry? My insurance will only cover me for a valid permit, so if the renewal is delayed due to deliberate inaction by LASD and I’m in an unfortunate DGU and defend my life, does this mean I’m screwed when the D.A. tries to throw me in prison?
“My insurance will only cover me for a valid permit”
what insurance would that be?
I use CCWSafe due to its premium coverage which includes volunteer church security staff, but of course its coverage is contingent upon the carrier obeying the law, which means I must be holding a valid permit. If my permit expires and isn’t renewed, then I’m not covered per the policy.
CA doesn’t allow open carry, and will only allow CC with a permit, which is very difficult to obtain (the legal argument for this is another topic). So if I don’t have a permit, I cannot legally carry. I paid a whopping $1650 throughout the entire application process to get mine, and now Newsom wants to *increase* the fees and requirements?
In many States (I’m looking at my neighboring NV), one may open carry without any requisites, but can CC only with a permit. Don’t want to pay for the permit? No problem…you can still OC. But here in CA we don’t have that option.
For comparison, only $10 for 4 years in NH, single-page application/renewal form. Unnecessary since 2017 except for reciprocity and exemption from the idiotic Gun Free School Zones Act.
A simple way to light a fire under their ass would be for a federal judge to rule that failing to issue a permit within 90 days make the concealed carrier legal to carry without any permit whatsoever.
That’s the only way to deal with bullshit like that… 🙁
Given the publicity about school shootings, one would think that judges could understand that it is imperative that the rights of parents to be armed to protect their children even on school grounds. Then again, our schools are now subjecting our children to unrelenting propaganda and psychological abuse to coerce them into undergoing genital mutilation surgeries. The most serious threats to our children are school teachers, councilors and administrators, not crazed, mass shooters
“unrelenting propaganda and psychological abuse to coerce them into undergoing genital mutilation surgeries“
Yes, the Judeo-Christian churches have been pushing ritual genital mutilation for literally hundreds of years.
But I haven’t seen anything at all like that in the schools.
I have seen much indoctrination by that same J-C cult to indoctrinate children in the schools, freedom from religion is a battle we fight every day.
MINOR49er. I have a RED HOT NEWS FLASH for you. Circumcision, what you call “ritual genital mutilation” is medically sound. You see the foreskin on the make retains moisture which in turn breads this thing we call fungus and germs. Have you ever heard of them?
Is New York About the Get the Shadow Docket?
Gazolla v Hochul?
“Is New York About the Get the Shadow Docket?“
Only if Clarence Thomas’s billionaire owners say so.
Christmas is coming and Clarence really enjoys a nice Christmas shindig:
“SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas’ aide collected Venmo payments from lawyers for judge’s Christmas party
Justice Clarence Thomas
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Justice Clarence Thomas
By DAVE GOLDINER | [email protected] | New York Daily News
PUBLISHED: July 12, 2023 at 7:35 p.m. | UPDATED: July 13, 2023 at 12:01 a.m.
A top aide to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas reportedly collected Venmo payments from top lawyers with cases in front of the court that were apparently earmarked for the controversial judge’s Christmas party.
The aide scooped undetermined amounts of cash from at least seven lawyers during the holiday season of 2019 along with memos suggesting the payments were intended for Thomas’ upcoming shindig, The Guardian reported Wednesday.”
Biden $10M bribe file released > https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-10m-bribe-file-released-burisma-chief-said-he-was-coerced-to-pay-joe-hunter-in-bombshell-allegations/ar-AA1e8eIi
“Biden $10M bribe file released”
Perhaps you should investigate the definition of the word ‘allegation’.
From the link you posted:
“A bombshell FBI informant file containing a $10 million bribery allegation against President Biden and his son was released Thursday by Sen. Chuck Grassley, showing that a Ukrainian oligarch claimed that he was “coerced” into making the payoff.”
Old news, and it’s all bullshit:
“Despite being interviewed as part of a campaign by Mr. Giuliani and his proxies in 2019 and 2020 to procure damaging information about the Biden family, Mr. Zlochevsky explicitly and unequivocally denied those allegations. Specifically, Mr. Zlochevsky denied (1) that anyone at Burisma had ‘any contacts’ with then former Vice President Biden or his representatives while Hunter Biden served on the Burisma board, and (2) that former Vice President Biden or his staff ‘in any way’ assisted Mr. Zlochevsky or Burisma,” wrote Ranking Member Jamie Raskin in the letter.“
$10million is chump change, compared to $2billion.
So where is your outrage about the actual $2billion bribe, ‘investment’ to Donald Trump’s son-in-law. Or is that different because it’s Republicans?
“Just months after leaving the White House in 2021, Jared Kushner secured a $2 billion investment from a Saudi crown prince-led fund, despite objections from the fund’s advisers about the deal.
A panel that screens investments for the Saudi sovereign wealth fund expressed concerns about Kushner’s new private equity firm, Affinity Partners. According to The New York Times, they cited issues like the firm’s inexperience, the possibility of the kingdom bearing most of the investment risk, unsatisfactory due diligence on the firm’s operations, an excessive asset management fee, and public relations risks due to Kushner’s previous role as a senior adviser to President Trump.“
And the Saudi royal family has been paying Jared Kushner $25million every year since then to ‘manage’ the fund.
Hypocrisy, they name is Republican.
Didn’t take the possibility seriously but if you are this upset over it guess I better look into it thanks for the tip.
SAFE,
The next question you should ask yourself is, why are the Saudis willing to give billions of dollars to the Trump family?
“Trump administration approved 2 nuclear deals to Saudi Arabia after Khashoggi was killed in Istanbul
The authorizations had been kept secret despite Congress demanding answers.
ByConor Finnegan
June 5, 2019, 12:33 AM”
I find it fascinating that conservative Republicans support Donald Trump providing nuclear technology to fundamentalist Muslims in the Middle East.
I guess Republicans weren’t happy with their intelligence failure costing 3000 dead Americans on 9/11, it seems that conservatives want to give secret nuclear technology to the Saudis so their next attack on America will be even more devastating.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/trump-administration-approved-nuclear-deals-saudi-arabia-khashoggi/story?id=63492793
no not particularly
MINOR49er, HORSE PUCKY. The “billionaires” don’t give a rat’s behind about the Second Amendment or your gun control issue. the only “bull shit” around here is spread by you and your Leftist control freaks.
Uhhh, it don’t matter what a judge says no more.
The Second Amendment is dead. Dont believe me, think about that and your rights the next time you’re filling out a 4473.
Possum,
I knew a guy, a dentist, who was injured terribly in an automobile accident caused by a drunk driver. The surgeons told the dentist he would never walk again…and that seemed certain to us all. The dentist, however, taught himself to meditate. Specifically, he taught himself how to focus his life-energy, his ‘chi’, on his spinal column to generate healing. He never gave up. After about two years he could move his feet a bit. Then more, then stand for a moment. By year three he could shuffle with a walker. At the end of that year he could walk independently. He was fierce…like an angry possum.
He should have sued the automobile maker for enabling that drunk driver.
“Better to light a single candle than to sit and curse the darkness”
“Sensative places” ?
Really? Does this refer to that woman who was arrested some time ago for carrying a gun in her over-sized buxom-ness?
LOL, ,,,,we are trying to forget about that damnit
Sensative, public, private, etc. with perimeters sums up the whole area of the state. Will USCCA cover my lawyer expenses if I carry anywhere in the state?, I think not. Until the slow machinations of the courts iron out this unconstitutional affront, take the chance? Thugs have better legal council and rulings than ‘the last of us’.
I’m thinking sensitive, pubic areas… 😉
Or maybe just stick the gun, or even just the laws and regulations up the asses of the politicians and appointees who try to negate God-given rights/responsibilities/duties. And no CLP.
“[Judge George L. Russell, III] left intact the prohibitions on carry in health care facilities, school grounds, government buildings, museums, state parks and state forests, casinos, mass transit facilities, stadiums, racetracks, and amusement parks.”
“This is certainly a good sign from the court.” — SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut
Um, from where I stand, leaving restrictions in place on carrying firearms for self-defense in all of those places is most certainly NOT a good sign.
Furthermore, delaying my completely mundane above comment for “moderation” is completely and totally unwarranted.
TTaG,
It is time to leave the WordPress website platform.
Comments are closed.