A handful of major Second Amendment rulings have been handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court in recent years. In the Garland v. Cargill ruling handed down by the High Court Justices earlier this year, the Supreme Court ruled that arbitrary bans of accessories like bump stocks are unconstitutional without a proper legal reason for their banning.

In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc v. Bruen case that local, state, and national legislating bodies cannot pass gun control laws that are historically inconsistent with the rights given to Americans as a result of the Supreme Court. As a result of this case, New York state’s law requiring Americans to provide a “proper cause” in an application for a concealed carry permit was ruled unconstitutional.

Another massive case seems to be making its way right up to the steps of the High Court Bench, one that could be even more groundbreaking than any Second Amendment case in history. This one could literally give anti-Second Amendment activists the “win” they want to ban whatever weapons they want.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled 9-5 in a Maryland gun control case that the state of Maryland is allowed to keep their “Assault Weapons Ban” bill on the books and enforce the legislation. This lawsuit was brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition against the 2013 Maryland law that was passed to ban specific weapons like AR-15 platform rifles and the Barrett .50-caliber rifle. Not only that, but the law also put a strict 10-round limit on any gun magazines being sold.

The appeals court ruled against the Firearms Policy Coalition saying that the bill is fair and that weapons that are “designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense,” can be banned by state legislating bodies.

“Moreover, the Maryland law fits comfortably within our nation’s tradition of firearms regulation,” Wilkinson wrote. Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson on the appeals court bench added. “It is but another example of a state regulating excessively dangerous weapons once their incompatibility with a lawful and safe society becomes apparent, while nonetheless preserving avenues for armed self-defense,” the Judge added.

The dissenting opinions suggest that it isn’t up to federal judicial officials to decide what is and isn’t safe, and that arbitrarily deciding that is a dangerous precedent. You could easily argue that a humble Glock is a “weapon of war” considering simple handguns are often used and employed by military personnel.

“The Second Amendment is not a second-class right subject to the whimsical discretion of federal judges. Its mandate is absolute and, applied here, unequivocal,” dissenting Judge Julius Richardson said about the ruling.

A U.S. Supreme Court Showdown Seemingly Inevitable

The Firearms Policy Coalition says that they will absolutely be appealing this case to the U.S. Supreme Court and they are confident that they will ultimately win. They believe that the law is on their side.

“FPC will take the Fourth Circuit’s terrible decision to the Supreme Court without delay. Our objective is simple: End all bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ nationwide. And we look forward to doing just that,” an FPC official shared with reporters after the appeals court loss.

This ruling from the appeals court does raise the serious concern that a state legislating body could pass a bill that bans virtually all viable weapons used in self defense, even a simple handgun with nine or ten rounds, and then have the courts rubber stamp the bill with this new 4th Circuit judicial precedence.

The U.S. Supreme Court has been inundated with huge cases to rule on in recent years, but it’s hard to imagine they ignore this one. The Justices with a conservative jurisprudence on the bench can likely see where this one is going and how quickly it could get out of hand.

Should the case be accepted by the High Court Justices, anti-Second Amendment activists will be seriously worried that the conservative Justices won’t just rule in favor of striking down the Maryland 2013 gun ban law. It’s more likely than not that the Justices would provide a national blanket opinion on this issue rather than leaving it open for further legal disputes down the line. That’s been the jurisprudence of all the Justices on the bench thus far, save a few cases here and there.

What do you think about this ruling? Do you think it will stand up to scrutiny from the U.S. Supreme Court Justices? Let us know what you think in the comments below.