At The Gun Feed:

WASHINGTON, DC (June 30, 2022) – Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced today that the United States Supreme Court has granted, vacated, and remanded its Bianchi v. Frosh lawsuit, which challenges Maryland’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” The case will now return to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals “for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen.”

[…]

“This is an important moment,” said FPC Policy Counsel Matthew Larosiere. “We have suffered at the hands of government actors who felt empowered by a lack of clear standards from the Supreme Court. All too often, horrible restrictions which threaten jail time for simply owning a common type of arm–one the people have an undeniable right to–were allowed to stand. This case presents one of the first opportunities to give force to our right to these common firearms, and we intend to see it through.”

The case was sent back to the lower court in light of Bruen. This is good reporting; TGF has included links to case documents and other links perhaps of interest to the case.

After congress let Reagan’s ASW ban expire during Bush Jr’s administration, I bought an “Assualt Weapon” in Maryland. There was a three-day waiting list. And get this: The county police showed up during that three days to inspect the weapon. I was young and very ignorant, but that was the local ‘law’ back then. This databasing of weapons has been ongoing for decades. Fill out 4473s if you want to, but keep in mind that: “wise a serpent, harmless as a dove” (Matthew 10:16) would indicate prudence in these matters. For the record, I no longer reside in MD nor have the weapon.

Reason.

Today I filed an amicus brief in support of a cert. petition challenging Maryland’s ban on various semiautomatic rifles. The case is Bianchi v. Frosh, and was brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and individual plaintiffs. Petitioners are represented by the D.C. powerhouse litigation boutique Cooper & Kirk. (Docket page here, Petition here.)

[ … ]

1. Many lower courts have narrowed Heller from below.

2. Failure to grant review would tempt Congress to enact a national ban, over-riding the policy choices of 43 states.

3. The Fourth Circuit’s novel rule that governments can ban all firearms that are supposedly “like” military arms is based on an egregious misreading of one phrase from Heller. The Fourth Circuit rule would uphold a ban on many common firearms, such as the ubiquitous Colt 1911 .45 caliber pistol, and every semiautomatic pistol that is essentially similar to the Colt, which is to say all of them.

4. The Maryland ban harms public safety because the rifles that it singles out for prohibition are easier to fire accurately, easier to store safely, and often superior for lawful self-defense. To say that improved firearms can be banned because criminals might take advantage of the improvements would be to say that firearms can never be improved.

He gets into “common usage” as well, and we can all agree that any weapon can be and has been a military weapon and that the common usage doctrine was an abominable and inconsistent idea.  As one reader pointed out recently, if something isn’t in common usage, it cannot be introduced into circulation and therefore will never become commonly used.

But Kopel is one of the good guys, and he knows what he’s doing.  He has to play within the rules he’s been given.