Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Upholds Nonresident Firearm Licensing
In the recent case of Commonwealth v. Marquis, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) addressed the constitutionality of the state’s firearm licensing requirements for nonresidents. The court concluded that the existing licensing scheme does not infringe upon Second Amendment rights or violate the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantees of equal protection and the right to travel.
Case Background
Philip J. Marquis, a resident of New Hampshire, was involved in a vehicular accident in Massachusetts while en route to his workplace. During the incident, authorities discovered that Marquis possessed a firearm without a Massachusetts license. He was subsequently charged with unlawful possession of a firearm under G.L.c. 269, §10(a), and unlawful possession of ammunition under §10(h)(1). Marquis filed a motion to dismiss these charges, arguing that Massachusetts’ nonresident firearm licensing scheme violated his Second Amendment rights, especially in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022).
Supreme Judicial Court’s Analysis
The SJC undertook a comprehensive analysis to determine the constitutionality of the Commonwealth’s nonresident firearm licensing scheme:
- Second Amendment Considerations: The court applied the framework established in Bruen, assessing whether the licensing scheme aligns with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The SJC found that Massachusetts’ “shall issue” licensing regime, which aims to restrict firearm access to individuals deemed dangerous, is consistent with historical practices. Therefore, the scheme does not violate the Second Amendment.
- Fourteenth Amendment Considerations: The court also evaluated claims that the licensing scheme infringed upon nonresidents’ rights to travel and equal protection. The SJC determined that the differences in licensing processes between residents and nonresidents are rationally related to legitimate state interests, such as public safety and regulatory oversight. Consequently, the scheme does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
The SJC’s decision in Commonwealth v. Marquis reaffirms the constitutionality of Massachusetts’ nonresident firearm licensing requirements. The court emphasized that the state’s licensing scheme is designed to promote public safety without infringing upon constitutional rights. As a result, the order allowing Marquis’s motion to dismiss was reversed, and the charges against him were reinstated.
