The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has consolidated two significant cases challenging Maryland's gun control laws, according to court documents filed Jan. 20, 2026. The consolidated appeals, numbered 24-1799 and 24-1827, pit gun rights advocates against state officials in a constitutional battle that could reshape firearms regulations in Maryland and potentially influence Second Amendment jurisprudence across the Fourth Circuit.
In case No. 24-1799, plaintiffs Susannah Warner Kipke and the Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. are challenging state officials including Governor Wes Moore, Maryland State Police Superintendent Roland L. Butler Jr., and Secretary of Natural Resources Joshua Kurtz. The case represents a direct challenge to Maryland's firearms regulations, with the gun rights organizations seeking to overturn restrictions they claim violate constitutional protections.
The second case, No. 24-1827, involves individual plaintiffs Katherine Novotny, Sue Burke, and Esther Rossberg, along with organizational plaintiffs Maryland Shall Issue, Inc., the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Firearms Policy Coalition. These plaintiffs are challenging the same core group of state officials, including Governor Wesley Moore, State Police Superintendent Butler, and Natural Resources Secretary Kurtz, while also naming several county prosecutors as defendants.
The defendants in the second case include States Attorney Alison M. Healey for Harford County, States Attorney Scott D. Shellenberger for Baltimore County, States Attorney Ivan J. Bates for Baltimore City, and Transportation Secretary Paul J. Wiedefeld. This broader scope of defendants suggests the challenge may encompass enforcement mechanisms across multiple jurisdictions within Maryland.
The cases have attracted significant attention from both gun control and gun rights advocacy groups. Supporting the state's position are prominent gun control organizations including Everytown for Gun Safety, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. These groups have filed amicus briefs backing the appellees.
The amicus support extends beyond advocacy organizations to include multiple states that have filed briefs supporting Maryland's position. The coalition includes the District of Columbia and 18 states: Illinois, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. This multi-state coalition suggests the case's outcome could have implications for firearms regulations beyond Maryland's borders.
The timing of these appeals is particularly significant as they come amid ongoing national debates over gun control measures and Second Amendment rights. The Fourth Circuit, which covers Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, has previously addressed gun rights cases, making its ruling potentially influential for firearms regulations across the mid-Atlantic and southeastern regions.
The constitutional challenges appear to target Maryland's gun control framework, though the specific regulations being contested are not detailed in the available court documents. Maryland has implemented various firearms restrictions in recent years, including assault weapons bans, magazine capacity limits, and enhanced background check requirements.
The plaintiffs represent a cross-section of gun rights advocacy, from individual Maryland residents to national organizations with significant legal resources. The Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association and Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. represent state-level advocacy, while the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition bring national perspectives and legal expertise to the challenges.
The involvement of multiple state prosecutors as defendants in one of the cases suggests the challenges may address enforcement mechanisms and prosecutorial discretion in implementing Maryland's gun laws. County-level prosecutors often play crucial roles in determining how state firearms regulations are enforced at the local level.
Governor Moore, who took office in 2023, has been a vocal supporter of gun control measures and has worked to strengthen Maryland's firearms regulations. His administration's approach to gun policy implementation appears to be a central focus of both legal challenges.
The Fourth Circuit's handling of these consolidated cases will be closely watched by legal observers, gun rights advocates, and gun control supporters nationwide. The court's decision could influence how other circuits approach similar constitutional challenges to state firearms regulations.
The cases represent the latest chapter in ongoing constitutional litigation over gun rights, following the Supreme Court's decisions in landmark cases that have reshaped Second Amendment jurisprudence. The Fourth Circuit's ruling could either strengthen or weaken Maryland's regulatory framework, depending on how the court interprets constitutional protections for gun rights.
As the appeals process continues, the outcome will likely affect not only Maryland residents but could establish precedent influencing gun policy debates across the Fourth Circuit's jurisdiction. The consolidated nature of the cases suggests the court recognizes the significance of the constitutional questions at stake and the need for comprehensive resolution of the challenges to Maryland's gun control laws.