Buckeye Reporter

On May 20, the Supreme Court of the United States denied certiorari in Bianchi v. Brown, a challenge to Maryland’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” This denial has raised concerns among gun owners that the Supreme Court is allowing a broad ban on firearms to stand in Maryland. These concerns have been amplified by news coverage that mischaracterizes the denial as a decision on the merits of the case. Headlines such as "High court shoots down challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban" from Courthouse News have contributed to this misunderstanding.

However, the Supreme Court did not "shoot down" the challenge; it merely decided not to hear it at this time. Denying certiorari in a case does not constitute a ruling on its merits or an endorsement of a lower court's decision. Justice Felix Frankfurter explained this in his dissent in Darr v. Burford (1950), stating: "The significance of a denial of a petition for certiorari ought no longer to require discussion. This Court has said again and again and again that such a denial has no legal significance whatever bearing on the merits of the claim."

In Bianchi v. Brown, the Supreme Court may be waiting for the Fourth Circuit to issue a decision on the merits so that there is a more fully developed record when it reaches them. The high court also chose not to deny certiorari in a similar NRA-backed challenge to Illinois' “assault weapon” ban, which will be considered again in conference this week.

While the path to Supreme Court review can be lengthy and complex, gun owners should not interpret denials of certiorari as substantive decisions by the court.

© 2024 National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced but not for commercial purposes.

###