Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Woollard v Gallagher - MD Req for Stay

Woollard v Gallagher - MD Req for Stay

Ratings: (0)|Views: 121 |Likes:
Published by jpr9954
Request from the State of MD for a stay in Judge Benson Legg's order.
Request from the State of MD for a stay in Judge Benson Legg's order.

More info:

Published by: jpr9954 on Jul 30, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/30/2012

pdf

text

original

 
_____________________No. 12-1437_____________________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
RAYMOND WOOLLARD,
et al.
,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.DENIS GALLAGHER,
et al.
,
 Defendants-Appellants.
_____________________
On Appeal from the United States District Courtfor the District of Maryland(Benson E. Legg, District Judge)
_____________________MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL_____________________
D
OUGLAS
F.
 
G
ANSLER
 Attorney General of MarylandD
AN
F
RIEDMAN
 Assistant Attorney General
 
M
ATTHEW
J.
 
F
ADER
 Office of the Attorney General S
TEPHEN
M.
 
R
UCKMAN
 Legislative Services Building Assistant Attorneys General90 State Circle 200 St. Paul Place, 20th FloorAnnapolis, Maryland 21401 Baltimore, Maryland 21202Tel. 410-946-5600 Tel. 410-576-7906July 27, 2012 Attorneys for Defendants-Appellants
Appeal: 12-1437 Doc: 56-1 Filed: 07/27/2012 Pg: 1 of 38
 
 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ........................................................................... 4STATEMENT OF FACTS ....................................................................................... 6ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................ 8I. A
 
S
TAY
S
HOULD
B
E
G
RANTED
B
ECAUSE
D
EFENDANTS
A
RE
L
IKELY TO
S
UCCEED ON THE
M
ERITS
,
 
W
ILL
S
UFFER
I
RREPARABLE
H
ARM IN THE
A
BSENCE OF A
S
TAY
,
AND THE
B
ALANCE OF
E
QUITIES AND
P
UBLIC
I
NTEREST
F
AVOR
E
NTRY OF A
S
TAY
................................................................ 8II. D
EFENDANTS
H
AVE A
S
TRONG
L
IKELIHOOD OF
S
UCCESS ON THE
M
ERITS
............................................................................................................ 8A. The Second Amendment Guarantees an Individual Right forLaw-Abiding Citizens to Keep and Bear Arms for Self-Defensein the Home, Subject to Exceptions ..................................................... 9B. The Permit Statute Does Not Burden Conduct Protected by theSecond Amendment ........................................................................... 111. The Public Carry of Firearms Has Long Been Subject toRegulation ................................................................................ 122. Heller Did Not Recognize a General Right to Carry Armsin Public ................................................................................... 16C. Even if the Permit Statute Burdened Conduct Protected by theSecond Amendment, It Would Satisfy the Applicable Level of Scrutiny .............................................................................................. 171. The Permit Statute Is Subject to No Greater thanIntermediate Scrutiny ............................................................... 172. The Permit Statute Satisfies Intermediate Scrutiny ................. 183. Other Courts Have Upheld Similar, and More Restrictive,Permit Statutes Under Intermediate Scrutiny .......................... 23
Appeal: 12-1437 Doc: 56-1 Filed: 07/27/2012 Pg: 2 of 38
 
 
iiIII. T
HE
L
IKELIHOOD OF
I
RREPARABLE
H
ARM IN THE
A
BSENCE OF A
S
TAY
F
AVORS
G
RANTING A
S
TAY
........................................................................... 24IV. C
ONSIDERATION OF
P
OTENTIAL
I
NJURY TO
O
THER
P
ARTIES
F
AVORS
G
RANTING A
S
TAY
......................................................................................... 28V. T
HE
P
UBLIC
I
NTEREST
F
AVORS
G
RANTING A
S
TAY
....................................... 29CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 30
Appeal: 12-1437 Doc: 56-1 Filed: 07/27/2012 Pg: 3 of 38

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->