O'Malley gets OK from attorney general to sign Maryland gun control bill

By ALEX JACKSON | Posted: Wednesday, May 8, 2013
4:26 pm

Dismissing claims that parts of Gov. Martin O'Malley's gun control plan
are unconstitutional, Maryland Attorney General Douglas M. Gansler has
given the governor the green light to sign the legislation next week.

In a letter to O'Malley on April 30, Gansler explained in his opinion
why several components of the gun control bill were constitutional.
Gansler, a Democrat, would be responsible for defending the bill if it
were challenged in court.

Leaders from the National Rifle Association and gun rights groups in the
state have said they will challenge the bill in court, but no lawsuit
has been filed. They claim the bill violates Marylanders' second
amendment rights.

But in his letter to O'Malley, Gansler assured the governor the bill
would stand up to a challenge.

“Senate Bill 281 was crafted carefully to balance the rights of
legitimate gun owners with the need for increased public and law
enforcement safety from gun violence,” Gansler wrote. “We are confident
the resulting legislation is constitutional and legally defensible.”

Senate Bill 281, passed by the General Assembly in April, bans the sale
of 45 types of military-style semiautomatic rifles, limits magazines to
10 bullets and requires a license for future handgun purchases.

O'Malley is expected to sign the bill May 16 at 10:30 a.m.

In his letter, Gansler addresses the constitutionality of the bill's
assault weapons ban, mental health provisions, handgun qualification
license, among other aspects of the bill.

Regarding the bill's second amendment implications, Gansler cites the
Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia vs. Heller.

In that decision, the court said Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns in
the home infringed on second amendment rights.

But Gansler said in his letter to O'Malley that all of the provisions in
his bill fall within the restrictions laid out in the Heller case.

“Many opponents of this bill expressed their belief that there is a
constitutional right to individual firearm possession that is exempt
from regulation,” Gansler wrote. “That belief, however, is not supported
by either the Heller decision itself: which is clear that there are
important limitations on the exercise of the Second Amendment right ...
or by comparison to other important constitutional rights which are
often regulated without constitutional violation."