The United States Supreme Court has chosen not to intervene in a couple of controversial cases involving Maryland’s handgun licensing laws and legal actions aiming to hold oil and gas companies accountable for climate change-related damages in Hawaii. This decision was unveiled in the court’s latest list of orders following the justices’ recent private conference.
In the first case, Maryland Shall Issue v. Moore, gun-rights advocates challenged Maryland’s law that requires residents to obtain a license before purchasing a handgun. The challenge was based on the contention that the state’s licensing requirement, which mandates a background check and a gun-safety course, places an undue burden on the Second Amendment right to bear arms. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit had upheld Maryland’s law, referencing Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which suggested that such requirements are likely constitutional.
Simultaneously, the Supreme Court has also declined to review two cases from Hawaii, Sunoco v. Honolulu and Shell v. Honolulu, where municipalities are seeking to hold fossil fuel companies responsible for property damage allegedly caused by climate change. Previously, the Supreme Court requested the opinion of the Biden administration on whether federal law would preclude these state-law claims. In a December submission, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar advised the Court against reviewing the cases, highlighting limitations on the Supreme Court’s capacity to assess the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision that allowed litigation to advance.
Additionally, Justice Samuel Alito abstained from participating in the Honolulu cases, possibly due to his investments in the involved energy companies, as disclosed in his 2023 financial disclosure forms.
In other actions, the Supreme Court has asked for federal government input on four new cases, including disputes over land ownership, interpretations of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, rights of action under the Investment Company Act, and citizen enforcement of the Clean Water Act standards.