Gun Laws And 2a
Federal Court Blocks Maryland’s Expanded Assault Weapons Ban
Fourth Circuit ruling halts enforcement of Maryland’s latest gun restrictions pending appeal
📅
✍️By ZRIntel Editorial Team📍Baltimore, MD
On August 17, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a major ruling temporarily blocking Marylands recently expanded assault weapons ban, marking another significant battlefront in the ongoing national debate over the scope of Second Amendment protections. The decision follows months of legal wrangling between the state government and gun rights organizations who argued that Marylands sweeping prohibition violated constitutional rights recognized under the Supreme Courts landmark 2022 Bruen ruling. The law in question, passed by the Maryland legislature earlier this year, expanded the states 2013 Firearm Safety Act by broadening the definition of so-called assault weapons. The updated statute prohibited the sale and possession of more than 40 additional semiautomatic rifle models, including variants of the AR-15 and AK-47 platforms, as well as restricting the sale of standard-capacity magazines over 10 rounds. Supporters of the expansion argued it was necessary to address rising concerns about mass shootings and urban gun violence. Governor Wes Moore signed the bill into law in March 2025, calling it a vital step toward keeping Marylands communities safe. Almost immediately, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and a coalition of Maryland gun owners filed suit, asserting that the new restrictions ran afoul of the Second Amendments plain text and failed the historical tradition test established by Bruen. Their attorneys argued that semiautomatic rifles are among the most popular firearms in America for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting, and therefore cannot be categorically banned. In its ruling, the Fourth Circuit agreed that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits. Judge Mark Reynolds, writing for the majority, stated: The State has not shown a historically grounded tradition of prohibiting common semiautomatic firearms. The categorical ban on widely owned rifles and magazines substantially burdens the core right of armed self-defense in the home and in public. The injunction prevents enforcement of the law while the case proceeds, effectively restoring legal access to the affected firearms and magazines in Maryland for the time being. Gun rights advocates celebrated the ruling as a significant win. Alan Gottlieb of the SAF noted, This decision is another affirmation that the government cannot simply outlaw firearms it doesnt like, especially when those arms are owned by millions of law-abiding Americans nationwide. The FPC likewise praised the court for upholding what it called constitutional fidelity and pledged to continue challenging similar laws in other states. Gun control proponents, however, expressed sharp criticism. The Brady Campaign and Moms Demand Action both released statements warning that the injunction puts Marylanders at greater risk of gun violence. They argued that the court had placed constitutional absolutism above public safety, undermining what they described as common-sense gun reforms supported by the majority of Maryland residents. The broader implications of the ruling are significant. With courts across the country reevaluating firearms restrictions under Bruen, states like California, New York, and New Jersey which also maintain strict bans on semiautomatic rifles could see their laws face similar challenges. Legal experts predict that the Maryland case may ultimately set the stage for another Supreme Court showdown on the question of whether so-called assault weapons can be prohibited under the Second Amendment.