In a significant victory for Second Amendment rights, a federal court has struck down Maryland’s Handgun Qualification License (HQL) requirement as unconstitutional. The ruling, made by a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, cited a landmark Supreme Court case from 2022 that reset how gun rights cases are treated. The National Rifle Association (NRA) hailed the decision as a significant victory for constitutional freedoms.
Maryland’s HQL requirement has been described by the NRA as a “draconian process.” The court’s majority opinion, written by Judge Julius Richardson, stated that obtaining a handgun in Maryland involves a long and burdensome path. Applicants are required to go through a registration process, including a background check, and obtain a separate carry permit. Additionally, they must obtain a “handgun qualification license,” which involves submitting fingerprints, undergoing a background investigation, and completing a four-hour firearms safety training course.
The court found that Maryland’s law violated the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens without providing a historical justification for the restriction. The ruling relied on the Supreme Court case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which set new legal tests for gun regulations. Governor Wes Moore, a Democrat, expressed disappointment with the court’s decision, stating that the law was intended to protect Marylanders from gun violence.
Firearms instructor and journalist Stephen Gutowski suggested that Maryland would likely appeal the decision en banc, hoping for a full panel of judges in the Fourth Circuit to overrule the ruling. However, Gutowski noted that Maryland’s chances of success would be slim at the Supreme Court level, given the Court’s recent rulings on gun rights.
While gun control advocates consider the ruling a setback, William Taylor, deputy director of litigation at Everytown Law, expressed optimism that the decision would be reversed by the full Fourth Circuit or the Supreme Court. He argued that Maryland’s law was consistent with the Second Amendment and the new legal test established by the Bruen decision.
The ruling has sparked debate about the balance between gun rights and public safety. Advocates for gun rights view it as a significant victory, while gun control advocates see it as a setback. The ultimate outcome of the case remains uncertain, as Maryland may appeal the decision further.
