On March 11, 2025, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) issued rulings in two pivotal cases—Commonwealth v. Marquis and Commonwealth v. Donnell—addressing the Commonwealth’s firearm licensing requirements for nonresidents in the face of Second Amendment challenges. These decisions shape the legal landscape of Second Amendment rights in Massachusetts, particularly concerning how nonresidents are permitted to carry firearms within the Commonwealth’s borders.
Background on Massachusetts Firearm Licensing
Massachusetts has strict firearm regulations requiring individuals to obtain a license to carry a firearm. Those convicted of carrying a firearm without a license are subjected to charges that include a mandatory 18 month jail sentence. Residents and nonresidents alike must apply for a license in order to legally carry firearms in Massachusetts, according to the SJC. Nonresident applications are guided by G. L. c. 140, § 131F, while the rules for Massachusetts resident licenses to carry can be found at G. L. c. 140, § 131. Possessing a firearm without the proper license outside of one’s home or business is prohibited under G. L. c. 269, § 10 (a).
Case Summaries
Commonwealth v. Marquis (SJC-13562)
- Facts: Philip J. Marquis, a New Hampshire resident, was found in possession of a firearm in Massachusetts without a nonresident license. He legally owned the firearm in his home state but had not obtained Massachusetts’ required temporary license.
- Legal Issue: Marquis challenged the constitutionality of Massachusetts’ nonresident firearm licensing laws, arguing it violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms, as well as his Fourteenth Amendment rights to travel and equal protection.
- SJC Decision: The court upheld Massachusetts’ licensing requirements, ruling that the process for obtaining a nonresident license does not infringe upon the Second Amendment. The SJC emphasized that the licensing requirements are lawful and do not violate equal protection or the right to travel.
Commonwealth v. Donnell (SJC-13561)
- Facts: Dean F. Donnell, Jr., also a New Hampshire resident, was arrested in Massachusetts for operating a vehicle under the influence. A firearm was discovered in his vehicle, and he did not possess a Massachusetts nonresident firearm license.
- Legal Issue: Donnell argued that the state’s firearm licensing requirements for nonresidents were unconstitutional, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), which reinforced the right to carry firearms for self-defense.
- SJC Decision: Unlike in Marquis, the court ruled that, at the time of Donnell’s arrest, Massachusetts’ discretionary “may issue” licensing scheme for nonresidents was unconstitutional as applied to Mr. Donnell. The SJC affirmed the motion to dismiss the charges against Donnell, holding that the Commonwealth’s firearm licensing laws for nonresidents were inconsistent with the Second Amendment.
Implications of the Rulings
The SJC’s decisions in Marquis and Donnell provide legal clarity on Massachusetts’ firearm licensing for nonresidents. Marquis upholds the current firearm licensing scheme, while Donnell confirms that past versions of the law were unconstitutional, at least as applied to Mr. Donnell. The ruling in Donnell suggests that Massachusetts must ensure that its firearm laws align with the Second Amendment’s protections.
For nonresidents traveling to Massachusetts with firearms, these rulings highlight the importance of understanding the state’s licensing requirements to avoid legal issues and potential criminal charges. Firearm owners should stay informed about potential legislative changes and court rulings resulting from these decisions.
If I had to make a prediction, I would guess that Mr. Marquis will appeal to the federal courts to overturn the SJC decision. Many gun rights advocates believe that the SJC got it wrong, so it will be interesting to see if the case goes up to the United States Supreme Court. In the meantime, make sure to follow the law as explained by the SJC.
