https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2022/10/key-parts-of-nys-new-gun-law-struck-down-by-federal-judge-in-syracuse.html?outputType=amp
More detailed article. Ruling applies to onerous application requirements and some “sensitive location” rules. Stayed for 3 business days to allow appeal.
Albeit without looking at the statutes, I do not believe “magazine limits will be gone.” As I read the announcement, what is disappearing is (1) the limitation of a licensed concealed carrier to a single reload; and (2) a maximum in any event of 20 rounds. The 10 round magazine limit appears in...
The cited authorities do not support the proposition that the Governor is required either to solicit or to follow the advice of the Attorney General, including but not limited to any purported interpretation by the AG of the US Constitution.
The Governor of Maryland is bound by oath to support the Constitution of the United States.
West's Annotated Code of Maryland
Constitution of Maryland Adopted by Convention of 1867
Article I. Elective Franchise
MD Constitution, Art. 1, § 9
§ 9. Oath or affirmation of office
Currentness
Every...
MSP's insistence on "third party" evidence of threats is arbitrary and capricious. The W&C application is under oath/penalty of perjury. The sworn statement of the applicant IS evidence, in and of itself.
See DC Code sec. 22-4514(b):
(b) No person shall within the District of Columbia possess, with intent to use unlawfully against another, an imitation pistol, or a dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife with a blade longer than 3 inches, or other dangerous weapon.
"Reasonable" time, place and manner restrictions, not arbitrary and capricious restrictions imposed with no coherent standard or individualized findings.
The Board's review is plenary. MSP's decision is entitled to no deference.
"Upholding" the law does not require restrictions.
Board procedures, including any rules providing for the Chair to control attendance by members would properly be the subject of rules proposed, discussed in an open meeting.
What is being referred to as "stet" seems functionally a continuance to allow the parties to take additional steps...
If there is coordination regarding which members will/will not attend, when and how is it being done? Because it seems like it should be done in the open meeting itself, not in some kind of backroom deal off the record.
Further, any discussion, deliberation and/or decision to have Members beyond a technical quorum "sit out" the meeting would seem to be subject to the Open Meetings Act.
COMAR 12.09.01.04(B)(7) says that "(7) A decision of the Board is based on a majority vote of Board members present at a meeting or hearing."
Excluding a Board Member from voting would appear inconsistent with this regulation.
Agreed the regulation is ambiguous/poorly drafted. Md. Code, Public Safety sec. 5-309(b) seems clearer on the issue:
Renewal of permit
(b) Subject to subsection (c) of this section, a permit may be renewed for successive periods of 3 years each if, at the time of an application for renewal...
Question for those who were there:
Did the Board discuss and agree on the new secret-ballot system in the open meeting, or did the Judge simply announce/direct that votes would be handled that way, or did the members seem already "in the know" so that they were prepared for secret ballots...