Euler Posted March 28, 2021 at 06:56 AM Posted March 28, 2021 at 06:56 AM Docket ... On April 24, 2018, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan signed Senate Bill 707 ("SB-707") into law. ... SB-707 bans a "bump stock, trigger crank, hellfire trigger, binary trigger system, burst trigger system, or a copy or a similar device, regardless of the producer or manufacturer." ... In addition to these specific devices, SB-707 has a catch-all provision that bans any "rapid fire trigger activator," which is defined to mean "any device" that, when installed in or attached to a firearm, "increases" the "rate at which a trigger is activated" "or" "the rate of fire increases." ... Petitioners filed suit in federal district court alleging that the bans imposed by SB-707 constituted a "taking" under the federal Takings Clause and the Maryland Takings Clause and Due Process Clause. ... The district court ruled that SB-707 did not effect a taking because "SB-707 involves neither a confiscation of rapid fire trigger activators by the State of Maryland, nor a mandate for Plaintiffs to cede title to or possession of them to the State." ... Over a scholarly dissent by Judge Richardson, the Fourth Circuit affirmed. ... MD's response is due March 29. Even though the items in question are firearm parts and accessories, this is really a 5A case.
Euler Posted March 29, 2021 at 05:14 PM Author Posted March 29, 2021 at 05:14 PM ... MD's response is due March 29. ... MD made the (extended) deadline. I haven't read it.
cybermgk Posted May 3, 2021 at 04:26 PM Posted May 3, 2021 at 04:26 PM IMHO it should have been tested on general Constitutionality do to vagueness to the point is unenforceable.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.