The group suing the state of Delaware for its semi-automatic weapon ban says the future of the case depends on two separate court cases.
The Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association (DSSA) filed a lawsuit in 2022 in the U.S. District Court for Delaware arguing the state’s new semi-automatic weapon and large-capacity magazine bans are unconstitutional.
In conjunction with the lawsuit, DSSA requested a preliminary injunction to the state from enforcing the bans until the merits of the case are decided.
That request was denied, appealed, denied again, and Monday the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear it.
DSSA president Jeff Hague says his group asked the high court to take up its injunction request in hopes of resolving a difference between two appellate courts.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied DSSA’s request to halt the ban solely because a plaintiff will likely succeed on the merits of a constitutional claim, but Hague says the Ninth Circuit saw it differently.
The Ninth Circuit granted a preliminary injunction in a similar case because it involved a constitutional issue, and Hague says DSSA hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would resolve the discrepancy.
“They decided not to for whatever reason. That doesn't mean it can't go back, but all that means is that the preliminary injunction is not issued — the case goes back to District Court to be tried on the merits," Hague explained.
But the District Court for Delaware will not hear the case until the merits of two similar cases are settled.
Ocean State Tactical vs. Rhode Island challenges that state’s large-capacity magazine ban and Snope vs. Brown challenges Maryland’s semi-automatic weapon ban.
“Our case will stay on hold until it is decided what to do with the Maryland case and the Ocean Tactical [case] because our case was combined, the magazine and the semi-auto. The District Court is not gonna go forward with it until that's decided," Hague said.
Both cases remain on a list of those under consideration by the high court as of Friday.
DSSA is also suing the state for its recently passed permit-to-purchase law, which requires those looking to purchase a handgun to have completed an approved firearm training course.
The state filed a motion to dismiss the case in September, which has yet to be ruled on.
