SILVER SPRING, Md. — A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland’s decade-old ban on military-style firearms commonly referred to as assault weapons.

A majority of 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges rejected gun rights groups’ arguments that Maryland’s 2013 law is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review this case in May, when the full 4th Circuit was still considering it. Maryland officials argued the Supreme Court should defer to the lower court before taking any action, but the plaintiffs said the appeals court was taking too long to rule.

Maryland passed the sweeping gun-control measure after a 20-year-old gunman killed 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in 2012. It bans dozens of firearms — including the AR-15, the AK-47 and the Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifle — and puts a 10-round limit on gun magazines.

The Firearms Policy Coalition Inc., one of the plaintiffs challenging Maryland’s law, said it would again ask the Supreme Court to review the case.

“Our objective is simple: End all bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ nationwide. And we look forward to doing just that,” coalition president Brandon Combs said in a statement.

The 4th Circuit’s full roster of judges agreed to consider the case after a three-judge panel heard oral arguments but hadn’t yet issued a ruling.

The weapons banned by Maryland’s law fall outside Second Amendment protection because they are essentially military-style weapons “designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense,” Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote in the court’s majority opinion.

“Moreover, the Maryland law fits comfortably within our nation’s tradition of firearms regulation,” Wilkinson wrote. “It is but another example of a state regulating excessively dangerous weapons once their incompatibility with a lawful and safe society becomes apparent, while nonetheless preserving avenues for armed self-defense.”

Eight other 4th Circuit judges joined Wilkinson’s majority opinion. Five other judges from the Virginia-based appeals court joined in a dissenting opinion.

The law’s opponents argue it’s unconstitutional because such weapons are already in common use. In his dissenting opinion, Judge Julius Richardson said the court’s majority “misconstrues the nature of the banned weapons to demean their lawful functions and exaggerate their unlawful uses.”

“The Second Amendment is not a second-class right subject to the whimsical discretion of federal judges. Its mandate is absolute and, applied here, unequivocal,” Richardson wrote.

Wilkinson said the dissenting judges are in favor of “creating a near absolute Second Amendment right in a near vacuum,” striking “a profound blow to the basic obligation of government to ensure the safety of the governed.

“Arms upon arms would be permitted in what can only be described as a stampede toward the disablement of our democracy in these most dangerous of times,” Wilkinson wrote.

Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown praised the court’s decision.

“The Court’s decision today will save lives,” Brown said in a statement. “Access to weapons of war that have no place in our communities causes senseless and preventable deaths.”

The latest challenge to the assault weapons ban comes under consideration following a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that “effected a sea change in Second Amendment law.” That 6-3 decision signified a major expansion of gun rights following a series of mass shootings.

With its conservative justices in the majority and liberals in dissent, the court struck down a New York law and said Americans have a right to carry firearms in public for self-defense. It also required gun policies to fall in line with the country’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The 4th Circuit previously declared the ban constitutional in a 2017 ruling, saying the guns banned under Maryland’s law aren’t protected by the Second Amendment.

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court in that majority opinion, calling the law “precisely the type of judgment that legislatures are allowed to make without second-guessing by a court.”

The court heard oral arguments in the latest challenge in March. It’s one of two cases on gun rights out of Maryland that the federal appeals court took up around the same time. The other is a challenge to Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements.

Separately, a federal judge last week ruled that a 2023 Maryland law can’t prohibit licensed gun owners from carrying firearms in bars and restaurants and in private buildings without the owner’s permission. However, Chief U.S. District Judge George Russell upheld other gun restrictions in the state law. Those include bans on carrying firearms in health care facilities, schools, government buildings, amusement parks, mass transit facilities, race tracks, casinos, museums, state parks and stadiums.

Maryland lawmakers approved the law last year in response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a New York law that was very similar to Maryland’s “good and substantial reason” standard for permits to carry concealed handguns.

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

The stories that matter on money and politics in the race for the White House

China is to impose controls on the production of critical chemicals for the manufacture of fentanyl, in a sign of rising co-operation between Beijing and Washington over efforts to crack down on the deadly synthetic opioid.

The Biden administration on Tuesday said China would impose regulations and controls on three essential chemicals used in fentanyl from September.

The move — a process known as “scheduling” — marks the first time China will impose restrictions on the production of ingredients for the drug in six years.

The White House said it was a “valuable step forward” that followed a meeting between senior US and Chinese officials in Washington last week.

Washington has been pressing Beijing for several years to crack down on the production of ingredients used in fentanyl, which it estimates claimed the lives of almost 75,000 Americans in 2023.

US officials say the illicit drug has become the leading cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 45.

The enhanced US-China co-operation stems from an agreement reached between President Joe Biden and President Xi Jinping at a summit in San Francisco in November 2023.

The two leaders agreed to create a working group to tackle the fentanyl issue as part of an effort to stabilise turbulent relations between the two powers.

In 2019, China took measures to stem exports of fentanyl to the US, causing Chinese groups to shift their focus to making the chemicals needed to produce the drug. They have been sending the chemicals to cartels in Mexico which produce fentanyl for distribution in the US market.

In a statement, the Chinese government said it would subject three chemical ingredients — 4-AP, 1-boc-4-AP, and Norfentanyl — to controls from September 1.

“China has always attached great importance to international counter-narcotics co-operation and is willing to co-operate with countries worldwide including the United States,” said Liu Pengyu, the Chinese embassy spokesperson in Washington. “We hope that the US side can work with China in the same direction, and continue our co-operation based on mutual respect, managing differences, and mutual benefits.”

UN member states in 2022 agreed to impose international controls on the same chemicals, but China had until now not subject them to corresponding domestic controls.

Congress has become increasingly vocal in its criticism of China over the fentanyl crisis.

In a report in April, the House China committee blamed Beijing for the fentanyl epidemic and accused it of creating programmes to reward companies for exporting fentanyl and other illegal drugs to the US. The Chinese government has rejected the accusation.

Fentanyl is expected to be a significant election issue as vice-president Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump battle for the White House.

According to a Morning Consult/Bloomberg poll earlier this year, 44 per cent of respondents said the approach to the drug was a “very important” in deciding who they would vote for in November.

The Biden administration last week urged Congress to pass legislation that would designate fentanyl-related substances as “Schedule I” drugs — which have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse — that would lead to higher penalties for distribution and possession.

Philadelphia, PA
CNN
 — 

Tim Walz was in the midst of his interview with Vice President Kamala Harris’ vetting team when he told them there was something important they needed to know.

He doesn’t use a teleprompter, the Minnesota governor said. He doesn’t even have one, in fact. So if he was the pick, Walz said, Harris’ team would have to get him a teleprompter and teach him how to use it.

It was a lighter moment, but it was also part of an interview process with Harris’ team that Walz aced, multiple sources familiar with the meeting told CNN. The Minnesota governor was upfront about his vulnerabilities, noting he wasn’t from a swing state or a household name. He also said he was a bad debater.

But Walz made it clear he would be a team player.

Asked how he saw his role as VP, Walz said he would perform the job however Harris wanted him to. Asked if he wanted to be the last person in the room before Harris made a decision, Walz said only if she wanted him to be there.

And asked if he had ambitions to run for president himself one day, Walz said he did not, a point that sources said was not lost on a team looking to minimize the potential for any internal drama in a future Harris administration.

“He had a very clear understanding that it was to be a partner, but to support the president, go out and connect with America and be that governing partner,” said Cedric Richmond, a former Louisiana congressman and Biden White House adviser who was deeply involved in the selection process. “It’s not the easiest of positions, but it’s a very important position.”

The vetting interview  was a key step for Walz to ultimately lock up the selection that Harris made after sitting down with the three finalists, including Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, for one-on-one interviews at her residence on Sunday.

“It was a home run,” said one source familiar with Walz’s meeting with Harris’ vetting team. “Everyone loved him.”

Beyond the personal chemistry Harris and her team felt toward Walz, people familiar with the interview process said that Walz was also someone Harris felt could attract the kinds of voters that Democrats have lost to Donald Trump— voters that Harris may not be able to connect with on her own.

“He hunts, he fishes, you want to have a beer with him,” said the source familiar with Walz’s meeting. “He will play in Michigan, Wisconsin, Western Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina.”

A longtime Democratic operative who has known Walz for years agreed, saying: “He talks and looks like a lot of the voters we’ve lost to Trump.”

By Tuesday, staffers at the Harris campaign headquarters were already joking about the “Blue Walz,” referencing the key midwestern battleground states that they hope he will help her lock up.

Shapiro – who was favored by some of the Democratic Party and anti-Trump Republicans as a more moderate selection – did not go over as well with Harris’ team during his vetting interview, sources familiar with the process told CNN. While Walz came across as deferential and cooperative, Shapiro struck some as overly ambitious, with “a lot of questions” about what the role of the VP would be.

And while Shapiro did “very well” in his in-person meeting with Harris on Sunday, multiple sources said, Walz was seen as a pick that would come with less drama and palace intrigue – both on the campaign trail and, if they win in November, at the White House.

“It was a striking contrast” between the two, said the source familiar with the meeting.

Walz was an unexpected contender to become the No. 2 on the Democratic ticket – he was hardly mentioned among the potential contenders when Joe Biden dropped out a little over two weeks ago. But sources familiar with the selection process described Walz as the walk-on player who was ultimately picked for the team over the five-star recruits because he was a Midwestern governor who can campaign as a natural on the stump as a fellow “happy warrior.”

Walz, who was a 24-year Army National Guard veteran and high school teacher before entering politics, brought a “joy and excitement” to the process that ultimately won Harris and her team over, said another source.

Walz was the running mate option that Harris knew the least — but he won over the Democratic nominee, as well as her team, by making clear he would adapt to her style and policies.

Harris had not been expecting Walz to say he didn’t plan to run for president, a source familiar with her thinking told CNN. But afterward, as she sat around the same dining room table in the Naval Observatory, Walz’s answer stuck with her.

“That showed his willingness to say, ‘Look I’m not concerned about my image or my approval rating or what’s next for me in the next chapter of life. I’m going to stay in this moment, be your vice president, run through walls, fight for the American people and demonstrate our values,’” said Richmond. “That’s a strong and compelling argument.”

‘At ease and very natural’

The elevation of Walz was the culmination of a remarkable whirlwind, a capstone to a two-week campaign to join the Democratic ticket – first, with a goal of catching the attention of the Harris team and second, to win over the vice president herself.

“He was at ease and very natural,” said a senior Democratic adviser who was briefed on Walz’s face-to-face interview with Harris. “It was a ‘know-it-when-you-see-it’ type of thing.”

While much of the attention around the vetting process focused on the work being done by former Attorney General Eric Holder and former White House counsel Dana Remus, the questions beyond the paperwork and biographical scrubs really started last Friday with video interviews for the candidates being considered.

The Zoom calls also featured an until-now secret three-person committee: Richmond, former Boston mayor and Labor Secretary Marty Walsh and Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto.

Richmond has become a top adviser to Harris. Walsh and Harris grew close during his time in the Biden administration. Cortez Masto was elected the same year to the Senate with Harris, but they’d also previously served as attorneys general together through the landmark multistate mortgage settlement that became a defining moment for both their careers in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.

The three-person group was picked for geographic diversity, different skill sets and background. But most of all, they were picked because they were who Harris trusted to help figure out whom she could trust, which many who know her acknowledge is often the hardest thing for Harris.

Richmond and Walsh, who both went from being elected officials to members of Biden’s administration, were there to help answer a question very much on Harris’s mind after her own experience as vice president: “She wanted to make sure that we could ask questions like, ‘You’re going to go from a principal to a hybrid principal/staffer. Can you make that transition?’” according to one source familiar with the process.

Of the nine options vetted, and six who met virtually with the committee, Walz and Shapiro entered the rushed final weekend as the clear favorites, three people involved in the process told CNN. Kelly was included as a third option.

Walz was propelled by support from across the Democratic Party – progressive and moderate factions alike – in a sophisticated campaign guided by some of the party’s most seasoned operatives. He had former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on his side – old allies from his 12 years in Congress representing a rural Minnesota district – as well as glowing words from former President Barack Obama, who said in a statement Tuesday of Walz, “He has the values and the integrity to make us proud.”

Obama also served as a “sounding board for Vice President Harris to talk through how she was thinking about it,” said one senior aide.

As Walz gained traction online for his comment that Republicans were “weird,” Harris was watching, too.

“She likes the way he operates,” said a person involved with the process. “She liked how it became a thing then. It was funny, it was pointed, but it wasn’t over the top.”

While Harris and Walz did not have much of a previous relationship – a fact that some around Walz worried might be his downfall in the process – aides said Harris grew increasingly enthusiastic by how Walz carried himself during the process. A courtesy call between Harris and Walz on July 21, the same Sunday afternoon Biden stepped aside, sparked a formal vetting process that ultimately led him to the top of the ranks of finalists.

Along the way, many Democratic leaders believed Shapiro was the frontrunner in the sudden race to become Harris’ running mate. Extensive polling and focus groups conducted by the Harris campaign showed no nominal difference among the final contenders, but two Democratic advisers close to the search process acknowledged Shapiro, who is Jewish, had become something of a lightning rod for Gaza protests that Harris was not eager to revisit, an issue that’s divided Democrats throughout the 2024 campaign.

“Nobody wanted to rip that scab back open,” one of the Democrats said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss a confidential process. But other sources close to the vetting process pushed back on the notion that the Gaza protests had anything to do with Harris’ decision to pick Walz over Shapiro.

In the end, the bigger hurdle for Shapiro was his face-to-face meeting with Harris, where he posed “very specific” questions about the role of a vice president, including what decisions he would be included in making, should they win election.

“He was negotiating the job with her, while Walz was saying ‘What can I do to help?’” said the Democratic adviser, who added that Shapiro was unquestionably a rising star in the party but just didn’t meet the moment and forge a comfortable connection with Harris.

For Walz, the evolution from being seen as a moderate Democrat – winning a Republican-leaning congressional district in 2006 – to becoming a leading progressive governor impressed Harris and her team about his appeal.

Walz’s deferential style was also a huge factor in his appeal with Harris, sources said.

“She wanted to make sure that people understood there are going to be times when you’ll have great influence and there are going to be times when something’s happening and you’re told about it at the last minute,” said one of the people involved in the vetting process. “She said, ‘That’s just the nature of the job and you have to be OK with that.’”

Donuts and a teleprompter

Ahead of Harris’ three interviews on Sunday with Walz, Shapiro and Kelly, a panel of close advisers presented findings and recommendations to Harris at her residence at the Naval Observatory.

As they did, other senior campaign staff prepared videos and logos and merchandise for the various options. They waited, not knowing which way Harris would go. They wrestled with wrapping their minds around how different the options really were, and what each would mean for the campaign and for them.

According to sources familiar with the process, Harris was immediately leaning toward Walz after the Sunday meetings. But she felt torn through the end.

Harris slept on it Sunday. By Monday, she was quietly closing in on selecting Walz, informing only a small group of advisers of where her thinking stood that evening, a source familiar with the matter said. Harris went to bed Monday morning without making any official decision.

Small teams of staffers were sent to be on location for each of the final three options, none of them knowing when they woke up on Tuesday morning what the day was going to bring.

Speeches for Tuesday night’s rally in Philadelphia were written in advance for all the options.

When Harris finally called Tuesday morning, Walz was at home with his wife and two children, along with his sister and brother-in-law. He didn’t answer the first call that came through that morning because it was from a blocked number and he didn’t want to miss a call from Harris.

She got him on the second try.

Walz was handed his speech shortly after Harris called to officially tell him he was the pick.  After a small family celebration, Walz brought donuts to staffers who were there with him and hopped on a call with a wider group of staff to thank them for their work.

After arriving in Philadelphia for the first joint Harris-Walz rally Tuesday, a source said that Walz practiced using the teleprompter ahead of taking the stage for his speech.

CNN’s John King, Arlette Saenz and Betsy Klein contributed to this report.