Jump to content

Gardner v Maryland - National CCW Reciprocity

Billy Bob

By Billy Bob
in Judicial Second Amendment Case Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Billy Bob Welcome New Member

Billy Bob

Posted
Posted (edited)

I couldn't find a thread for this here. If one already exists, please delete.

 

https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2025/12/11/north-carolina-womans-lawsuit-gives-scotus-a-chance-to-establish-national-reciprocity-n1230888

 

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20251211/nra-files-amicus-brief-urging-scotus-to-hear-case-of-virginia-ccw-holder-arrested-while-traveling-through-maryland

Edited by Billy Bob
Added another link
mab22 Member

mab22

Posted
Posted

So the part in the WGL video, “but the bargain came with a promise that the federal constitution would secure the rights of all Americans in all states.” 
Sounds like federal carry or federal possession concept. 
You’re a federal citizen, 2A applies to all law abiding federal citizens, regardless of state of residence. 
 

Wasn’t there someone several years ago that went to jail for a AR in the trunk or maybe a handgun which didn’t meet the capacity limit and they were out of state? 

 

TomKoz Member

TomKoz

Posted
Posted

Hmmm 🤔.   IANAL.   Asking, since unconstitutional laws are not enforceable (I do believe there is Supreme Court precedent on that), does that mean that anyone that had been charged, jailed, fined, imprisoned, etc. IN THE PAST, can seek recourse / reimbursement IF the Supreme Court rules in favor of Plaintiff in this case?

 

Wondering Once IL FOID / CCL licensing laws are finally ruled Unconstitutional - can we get our $$ back ???????

 

 

mab22 Member

mab22

Posted
Posted
On 12/17/2025 at 12:43 AM, TomKoz said:

 

Wondering Once IL FOID / CCL licensing laws are finally ruled Unconstitutional - can we get our $$ back ???????

 

 

Yes, you can get your money back from the state provided you have captured enough unicorn dust rainbow chunks. 
 

  • 5 weeks later...
Euler Member

Euler

Posted
Posted
On October 22, 2025, Gardner filed a petition for certiorari. (docket)

On November 3, MD waived its right to respond.

On November 12, the Court requested a response, anyway, due December 12.

On November 19, MD requested an extension to January 26.

On November 20, the Court granted the extension.

On January 14, MD requested another extension, this time to February 25.

On January 16, the Court granted the extension.

Petition for certiorari said:
...
QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Does Maryland's prohibition on carrying a handgun without a state permit, as applied to an interstate traveler with a valid Virginia concealed carry permit who displayed a loaded firearm in self-defense against an assailant's vehicular assault and physical advance, violate the Second Amendment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen ... by lacking a historical tradition of disarming law-abiding citizens in such circumstances?

2. Did the Maryland courts' reliance on a video showing the assailant's calm demeanor upon police arrival, without his testimony or other witnesses to corroborate the incident, while disregarding Petitioner's evidence of the assailant's PIT maneuver, vehicular coercion, and physical advance, violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause by denying Petitioner a meaningful opportunity to present a self-defense claim?

3. Does Maryland's refusal to recognize Petitioner's valid Virginia concealed carry permit for interstate travel violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause ... or the Firearms Owners' Protection Act ..., despite the firearm being loaded and Pennsylvania's non-recognition of the permit at the time of the incident?
...
Petitioner Eva Marie Gardner, a law-abiding citizen with a valid Virginia concealed carry permit, was traveling through Maryland on January 16, 2021. In Montgomery County, an assailant executed a PIT maneuver, striking Petitioner's vehicle, and used his car to force her off I-270. ... When he continued advancing, Petitioner displayed her loaded handgun in self-defense to protect against the imminent threat. ... The assailant could not be located post-incident. Police released the assailant and arrested Petitioner for violating Maryland Criminal Law ... At trial in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Petitioner argued that her actions were protected by the Second Amendment under New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen ... citing her Virginia permit and the assailant's actions (PIT maneuver, vehicular coercion, physical advance). She also raised self-defense under Maryland common law .... The trial court rejected these defenses, relying on a video showing the assailant's post-incident demeanor, despite his absence as a witness, and the lack of a Maryland permit, convicting her on August 25, 2022 .... The Appellate Court of Maryland affirmed, dismissing Petitioner's Bruen and due process claims on April 18, 2025 .... The Supreme Court of Maryland denied certiorari on July 29, 2025, barring reconsideration ....
  • 4 weeks later...
press1280 Member

press1280

Posted
Posted

An interesting case and certainly an ideal plaintiff for attacking on the reciprocity angle. But the fact this happened pre-Bruen and the other issues with this case make it rather messy and not something I see SCOTUS wading into.

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
mab22 Member

mab22

Posted
Posted
On 3/27/2026 at 1:17 PM, Yeti said:

Brief filed by law firm of Cooper and Kirk as explained here.  

Just wait, this may be the 2A case that gets picked. 
The way 4BD describes it,

Person convicted, not just an infringement like magazine size.
The Maryland CCL process was/is illegal since Bruen. 
Effects interstate travel, and other states like Illinoistan.

Full faith and credit issues of permit issued in home state, like a drivers license but for a constitutional right. 



 

ragsbo Member

ragsbo

Posted
Posted
On 3/28/2026 at 8:01 AM, TRussell said:

It is time for nation wide concealed carry. 

We have it, the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution. Just start enforcing it! Shall not infringe will solve it all! 

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
mab22 Member

mab22

Posted
Posted

I missed a few posts up where it has the X thing that shows petition denied In April.
What the heck does SCOTUS want if they are not taking these cases up, the courts are ignoring everything they have already said….
 

 


 

 

EdDinIL Member

EdDinIL

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 5/13/2026 at 9:06 AM, mab22 said:

What the heck does SCOTUS want

They want time for the Democrats to win the House, the Senate, and the Presidency so they can pack the courts.  Then the now-minority pro-freedom Justices can dissent the heck out of every anti-2A ruling and feel good about themselves.

Edited by EdDinIL

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...