Maryland was initially granted a 30-day extension to respond to the Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court in the case of Snope v Brown in which Knife Rights has filed an Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court) Brief in support of petition. As reviewed below, this is a critical Second Amendment case. When Maryland sought an additional 30-day extension, SCOTUS denied them the full 30 days, allowing them only 10 additional days until November 12, 2024. This was in line with the Petitioners’ request of no more than 13 days in order to maintain the likelihood of a Conference in December.
Many involved expected that Maryland would continue to request 30-day extensions in order to delay action on the petition. This grant of only 10 more days signals that SCOTUS will not play that game. It appears they would like to hold Conference this year in order to hear the case in the 2024-2025 session, assuming Certiorari is granted.
Based on the Court’s response to the extension request and the early November due date, there’s a very good chance that the the petition will be considered in conference sometime in December (though technically this could be delayed). This is when the Justices decide what cases they will grant Cert to be heard. Four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case. If four votes are not to be had, Cert is denied, the case doesn’t move forward.
Assuming a December conference vote, we could know as early as late December or January if Cert will be denied or granted. If granted, the case would be scheduled for a hearing in the Spring of 2025. In that case, Knife Rights will, once again, file an amicus brief.
Background:
The petition seeks review of the en banc Fourth Circuit’s incredibly flawed decision that so-called “assault weapons” are not “arms” protected by the Second Amendment despite being owned by millions of Americans and being the most popular rifle in the U.S. today. Knife Rights experienced a very similar outcome with the decision in our case challenging the constitutionality under the Second Amendment of California’s ban on automatically opening knives (switchblades) 2-inches and longer.
Click to read the Amicus Brief.
We have a vested interest in SCOTUS providing even clearer guidance on the issue of what arms are protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment, as requested by the Petitioners. Unfortunately, courts that are unfriendly to the Second Amendment continue to tie themselves in knots to avoid the clear directives from the Bruen decision. Many, like the Fourth Circuit, are choosing to read more into the plain text of the Second Amendment than exists, adding requirements that obviously do not appear in the Second Amendment in an effort to avoid classifying their disfavored weapons as protected arms.
Knife Right Chairman, Doug Ritter, said, “An opinion on this case would likely be dispositive for our Second Amendment knife cases, doing away with these anti-2A courts’ shenanigans. In order to get to that step, SCOTUS first has to accept this case, which is what this petition for cert and ours and others’ supporting amicus briefs are all about. Otherwise, we will see a minority of courts continue to flaunt SCOTUS’ directions on 2A law, penalizing millions of law-abiding Americans, including many knife owners, with clearly unlawful rulings. It is time for SCOTUS to end this farce and this is the perfect case with which to do so.”
Knife Rights’ recent experience with two lower courts at opposite ends of the nation coming to contradictory determinations regarding switchblades as arms protected by the Second Amendment provides us a unique perspective to present to SCOTUS. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found switchblades to be arms under the plain text of the Second Amendment in a well-reasoned decision abiding by SCOTUS’ precedent. However, four days earlier, the Federal District Court in San Diego said they were not arms, adding to the plain text of the Second Amendment by requiring automatically opening knives to be “in common use for self-defense” in order to be considered arms under the ordinary meaning of the Second Amendment. Just as with the case on petition, that Court’s added requirements were both irrational and absurd (we have already filed our Notice of Appeal in that case).
Ritter continued, “The Petitioners are requesting that SCOTUS use this case to say ‘read our lips’ about what are arms covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment. Unfortunately, SCOTUS really does need to step in to close the ludicrous ‘loopholes’ these courts are concocting out of whole cloth to avoid recognizing the new reality presented by Bruen and Heller preceding it.”
The petitioners are David Snope and our good friends at Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Counsel for Knife Rights are George M. Lee and John W. Dillon.
Dillon said “It is vitally important that the Supreme Court grant this petition. The petition itself, along with our amicus, details the extraordinary lengths some courts are willing to go to in order to deny the people their fundamental right to keep and bear arms. If SCOTUS does not correct the lower courts now, contradictory and illogical decisions will continue to come out of the lower courts.”
Our litigation efforts are primarily funded by the 501(c)(3) Knife Rights Foundation. Please consider making a TAX-DEDUCTIBLE donation to the Foundation to help us. Please donate at KnifeRights.org/donate or call us toll-free at 866-889-6268 (10:00 AM – 5:00 PM Pacific).
Knife Rights is America’s grassroots knife owners’ organization; leading the fight to Rewrite Knife Law in America™ and forging a Sharper Future for all Americans™. Knife Rights efforts have now resulted in 49 bills repealing knife bans in 31 states and over 200 cities and towns since 2010, as well as a number of litigation victories.
Read the full article here