In the wake of Bruen, a lot of states had to scramble. They'd banked everything on simply prohibiting most people from lawfully carrying and now, suddenly, they were told they couldn't do that. They figured they had to come up with some other way to discourage people from getting carry permits.

A number of them came up with what was later termed "carry killer" bills that basically made it impossible to carry a firearm lawfully without explicitly banning the carry of a firearm. They used Bruen's "sensitive places" doctrine to decide pretty much everywhere was a sensitive place, but in a way that skirted the Supreme Court's warning about just declaring an entire city a sensitive place.

They simply named enough individual places as sensitive that it had much the same effect.

One such state was Maryland.

Unsurprisingly, this sparked a legal challenge from the Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation, Maryland Shall Issue, and three private citizens... and the state of Maryland isn't coming out too well on this one.

From a press release from the Firearms Policy Coalition:

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced today that United States District Court Judge George L. Russell, III has issued a decision declaring Maryland’s bans on firearm carry in locations selling alcohol, private buildings or property without the owner’s consent, and within 1,000 feet of public demonstrations unconstitutional in its federal Second Amendment lawsuit Novotny v. Moore. The opinion can be found at firearmspolicy.org/novotny.

“We are pleased the court blocked some of Maryland’s unconstitutional restrictions on the right to carry firearms in public,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “But we have more work to do and are committed to finishing the job. FPC and our allies will continue to fight forward until all peaceable people can fully exercise their right to bear arms in Maryland and throughout the United States.”

Novotny v. Moore was consolidated with Kipke v. Moore. FPC offers its thanks and congratulations to all plaintiffs in the consolidated cases, including its partners Maryland Shall Issue, Inc., Second Amendment Foundation, and Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc.

This challenge was brought as part of the high-impact FPC Law strategic litigation program to eliminate disarmament regimes and restore the natural right to keep and bear arms.

Now, the ban on places serving alcohol is one of those things I've seen even in some pro-gun states, and I can see the reasoning. People in places serving alcohol like bars are more likely to drink and we all know that booze and guns don't mix well. I disagree with it, in part because someone who is carrying isn't automatically a drinker, and prohibiting them from drinking while carrying would do the same thing.

But this is anywhere that serves alcohol at all. That means pretty much any restaurant with waiters. It means the vast majority of grocery stores or convenience stores. Basically, it means a ton of places.

Which is fine because you weren't allowed to carry in those places in the first place unless the owner gave positive consent in the first place, which means explicitly asking if you can carry a gun, which most people aren't interested in doing because they don't want to call attention to the fact they're carrying.

All that is now in the rearview mirror for folks in Maryland. That's the good news.

There's still plenty of bad news. For one thing, there's still an awful lot of gun control left to battle in Maryland. Another is that similar laws are currently in existence in a lot of other places and those need to be struck down as well.

One thing at a time, though. One thing at a time.