In January 2021, Petitioner Eva Marie Gardner, who has a valid Virginia handgun-carry permit, was driving from her Virginia home to visit her mother in Pennsylvania. While driving through Maryland, another driver struck her Jeep twice—she believed he was trying to run her off the road. Ms. Gardner called 911, saying she was afraid and had her gun with her. When the other driver approached, Ms. Gardner displayed her gun and told him to go back to his car. After hesitating, he complied.

Maryland charged Ms. Gardner with carrying and transporting a loaded handgun. She moved to dismiss the charges under the Second Amendment. After the trial court denied that motion, a jury convicted Ms. Gardner. She was given a thirty-day suspended sentence and six months of unsupervised probation. The Appellate Court of Maryland affirmed—though it noted that the state’s may-issue gun-permitting statute, in effect at the time of Ms. Gardner’s arrest, was later held unconstitutional. The Supreme Court of Maryland denied certiorari.

Ms. Gardner now seeks the U.S. Supreme Court’s review. Cato filed a brief urging the Court to grant her petition, vindicate the constitutional rights to bear arms and to interstate travel, and reverse the decision below. First, the brief explains that the Constitution protects the right of Americans to engage in interstate travel without interference by the states. The Court’s failure to fully uphold that right tragically helped to entrench the abuses of Jim Crow, whereas judicial protection of the right helped the Civil Rights Movement bring an end to that oppressive system. Second, the right to armed self-defense is a privilege of American citizenship that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to secure for all Americans. Finally, even today, interstate travel can be dangerous, and the need for self-defense outside the home is great.