Raymond Woollard v. Denis Gallagher
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5617
| 4th Cir. | 2013Background
- Maryland imposes a good-and-substantial-reason requirement for handgun permits outside the home.
- Numerous permit exceptions allow public carrying without a permit in certain circumstances.
- Appellees Woollard and the Second Amendment Foundation sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 challenging § 5-306(a)(5)(ii).
- District court enjoined the good-and-substantial-reason requirement as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
- Fourth Circuit reversed, applying intermediate scrutiny and upholding the provision as reasonably tailored to public safety.
- Maryland’s permit-issuance framework remains in effect for those not meeting the good-and-substantial-reason criterion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the good-and-substantial-reason requirement burden the Second Amendment outside the home? | Woollard contends it unlawfully burdened public-carry rights. | Maryland asserts a substantial public-safety interest justifies the restriction. | Burden assumed; upheld under intermediate scrutiny. |
| What level of scrutiny applies to outside-home handgun restrictions? | Masciandaro supports intermediate scrutiny; strict scrutiny unnecessary. | Takes a standard more tolerant than strict; intermediate applies. | Intermediate scrutiny applicable. |
| Is the good-and-substantial-reason requirement reasonably adapted to Maryland's interests? | Argues no adequate fit to reduce public danger. | Demonstrates substantial and balanced fit to public safety and crime prevention. | Yes, reasonably adapted; substantial fit. |
| Should the ruling be extended to facial challenges and Equal Protection claims? | Seeks facial invalidation and EP invalidation. | Constitutional application to Woollard suffices; EP and facial challenges fail. | Facial and EP challenges rejected; judgment reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2008) (core right to keep and bear arms for self-defense at home)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2010) (Second Amendment fully applicable to the States)
- United States v. Masciandaro, 638 F.3d 458 (4th Cir. 2011) (intermediate scrutiny outside the home; public-safety balance)
- Kachalsky v. County of Westchester, 701 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2012) (moderate approach to public-safety regulation; proper-cause analogy)
- United States v. Chester, 628 F.3d 673 (4th Cir. 2010) (two-part Chester framework for assessing Second Amendment limits)
- United States v. Marzzarella, 614 F.3d 85 (3d Cir. 2010) (spectrum of scrutiny for firearm regulation; outside-home context)
- Williams v. State, 10 A.3d 1167 (Md. 2011) (Maryland Supreme Court held outside-home carrying restrictions)