True- under maryland law- that individual is "effectively forbidden" by (IMO) what then becomes an unconstitutional law. Because it is effectively making it a requirement to have a "fixed address" to exercise a COTUS right. I doubt that would pass any level of scrutiny. (Assuming yet again its not a political hack judge interpretation of the law)they have protection and full rights. but if they cant follow the md law they cant exercise it.
Edit: I already think it's a unconstitutional law, but that's not the argument here.