On December 12, 2025, a coalition of 12 U.S. Senators, led by Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Eva Marie Gardner v. Maryland. The brief urges the Court to grant certiorari to review a decision by the Maryland Appellate Court, arguing that Maryland’s handgun carry law unconstitutionally infringes on the Second Amendment rights of interstate travelers.
The case centers on Eva Marie Gardner, a Virginia resident with a valid concealed carry permit, who was traveling to her mother’s home in Pennsylvania when her vehicle was struck twice and forced off the road in Maryland. Fearing for her safety as the other driver approached, Gardner displayed her loaded handgun, prompting the assailant to retreat. Despite acting in self-defense, she was convicted under Maryland Criminal Law for carrying and transporting a loaded firearm without a state permit.
The senators’ brief highlights the case’s sympathetic facts and its significance to Second Amendment jurisprudence. Over the past two decades, the Supreme Court has progressively affirmed the right to bear arms, beginning with District of Columbia v. Heller for home defense, extending to state protections in McDonald v. City of Chicago, and culminating in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, which affirmed public carry. The amici argue that this case represents the next critical step to ensure that the right to self-defense does not vanish at state borders.
The Maryland Appellate Court upheld Gardner’s conviction, declining to apply the Bruen framework, which requires courts to assess whether firearm regulations align with historical traditions of firearm regulation. Instead, the Court relied on a footnote in Bruen suggesting that “shall-issue” permitting schemes are generally constitutional, ignoring the footnote’s acknowledgment of potential as-applied challenges. The Court also ruled that reciprocity for out-of-state permits is not mandated under Bruen unless the Supreme Court or Congress acts otherwise.
The senators contend that this decision reflects a troubling pattern of lower courts’ failure to comply with Bruen’s directives. They assert that the Second Amendment’s text, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, demands unqualified deference to the American people’s constitutional determination. Had the Maryland court conducted a proper Bruen analysis, the amici argue, it would have found Maryland’s law unconstitutional as applied to Gardner, a law-abiding interstate traveler acting in self-defense.
The brief delves into the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, emphasizing that it does not include broad disarmament, particularly of interstate travelers. Historical evidence cited includes colonial and post-ratification statutes that exempted travelers from gun control laws. For instance, Alabama and Arkansas statutes in the 19th century allowed travelers to carry concealed weapons, while Texas and New Mexico laws permitted armed travel. This tradition, the senators argue, underscores a longstanding recognition of the heightened self-defense needs of those crossing state lines.
The amici criticize the Maryland court’s failure to conduct an individualized Bruen analysis, noting that the Second Amendment protects Gardner’s conduct, carrying a handgun for self-defense, as part of the “people” it safeguards. They argue that no historical analogue justifies disarming law-abiding citizens in such circumstances, a point the government failed to prove. The brief also challenges the imposition of permitting requirements on interstate travelers, citing the impractical burden of obtaining multiple state permits in a patchwork licensing system.
Reciprocity emerges as a key issue, with the senators arguing that it is both feasible and consistent with constitutional principles. They compare concealed carry permits to driver’s licenses, which are reciprocally recognized despite the absence of a constitutional right to drive. The brief asserts that no other constitutional right requires a permit, and treating the Second Amendment as a “second-class right” is untenable. States could address safety concerns through historical alternatives, such as requiring open carry for travelers, rather than imposing restrictive permit schemes.
The coalition of senators, including Ted Cruz, Ted Budd, John Cornyn, Steve Daines, Lindsey O. Graham, Jim Justice, James Lankford, Mike Lee, Cynthia Lummis, Ashley Moody, Rand Paul, and Thom Tillis, brings significant legislative expertise to the case. As members of Congress sworn to uphold the Constitution, they emphasize their duty to protect the Second Amendment for future generations. Senator Cruz, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights, underscores the judiciary’s role in safeguarding this fundamental right.
The brief calls on the Supreme Court to reaffirm Bruen’s framework, clarify that Maryland’s law is unconstitutional as applied to Gardner, and address the broader question of reciprocity. Legal representation is provided by H. Christopher Bartolomucci and Justin A. Miller of Schaerr | Jaffe LLP in Washington, D.C.
This case has sparked renewed debate over the scope of Second Amendment rights, particularly for interstate travelers. Advocates for gun rights see it as a critical test of Bruen’s application, while opponents argue that state sovereignty and public safety justify permit requirements. As the Supreme Court considers whether to take up the case, the decision could set a precedent with far-reaching implications for gun laws across the United States.
The filing comes as the nation continues to grapple with balancing individual rights and what anti-gun activists push as “public safety”, a tension rooted in the Constitution’s text and historical context. For Gardner, the outcome could determine whether her act of self-defense is recognized as a constitutional right or penalized as a violation of state law. For senators and their supporters, it is a chance to ensure that the promise of the Second Amendment extends beyond state lines, protecting all Americans on the road.
Find this article at Ammoland.
READ NEXT: Trump Shuts Down Controversial Program Effective Immediately
