Taker v. Blanche
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · No. 25-1651
⚖️Procedural — no merits ruling
Resolved on Article III standing and qualified immunity; the court never reached whether the firearm bans are constitutional.
GunMapUSA assessment of the outcome's direction, not a statement that the court decided rightly or wrongly.
What the court held
A Maine man subject to an agreed-to protection-from-abuse order, and with a prior federal marijuana felony, sued to invalidate the federal and state statutes barring him from possessing firearms and sought damages over the denial of his concealed-carry permit. The First Circuit held he had not plausibly alleged Article III standing for the declaratory and injunctive claims, because the protective order he consented to would have barred him from possessing a firearm regardless of the statutes, so invalidating them would not redress his injury. It vacated the dismissal of those claims and remanded for dismissal on jurisdictional grounds without prejudice, and separately affirmed dismissal of the damages claim on qualified immunity because the right asserted was not clearly established.
Summarized from the court's opinion.
What this case is about
Second Amendment challenge to federal and Maine bars on firearm possession by a person subject to a protective order
GunMapUSA summary of the issue, not a quotation from the court.
Key Dates
- 2026-06-22 — Decided
- 2026-04-09 — Argued
Sources
- CourtListener — retrieved 2026-08-08
Summary of public court records. Not legal advice.