Ohio Bill Takes Positive Step in Protecting Preemption

While most states have some form of preemption law on the books, the problem with many of them is that they just say local governments can’t pass their own gun control laws. There aren’t any actual teeth in those laws.

So, as a result, local officials can do what they want and then just hope the courts will side with them. This costs both the city and state money, as well as infringing on people’s rights in direct violation of what the state intended.

Take Savannah, Georgia, for example. Georgia is a preemption state, and local governments have lost pretty much every case where they tried to restrict guns on their own, yet Savannah still thought it could get around the measure.

The issue is that there’s no real punishment for doing so.

In Ohio, though, a bill seeks to take a positive step forward on just that.

A bill working its way through the Ohio legislature would allow residents to sue cities for punitive and/or monetary damages if they try to ignore the state’s preemption laws on guns. Another hearing is scheduled this afternoon.

Senate Bill 278, sponsored by Sen. Terry Johnson (R-McDermott), would permit individuals to seek punitive or exemplary damages against municipal corporations that pass gun control measures.

The Senate Local Government Committee’s third hearing on the measure is scheduled for 4 p.m. today, Feb. 10, in the Grant Hearing Room (should be able to watch here).

Under current law (ORC Section 9.68), a person, group, or entity adversely affected by any manner of ordinance, rule, regulation, resolution, practice, or other action enacted or enforced by a political subdivision could bring a civil action against said political subdivision “seeking damages from the political subdivision, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, or a combination of those remedies. Any damages awarded shall be awarded against, and paid by, the political subdivision.”

The proposed amendment would add legal teeth by strengthening damages to include “punitive or exemplary.”

This is good, to be sure, though I’m not sure that’s enough.

After all, it’s not like the local officials who try to implement such laws will be the ones footing the bill. That’ll be on the taxpayers, who may or may not support the ordinance. Granted, most of them likely do, or else a local government would never try it, but others won’t, and they’re just as screwed by their officials as the rest.

Personally, I think those who vote for such measures should be held personally liable for financial damages. Then, lawmakers would think twice about trying to push such things at the local level, especially since most aren’t as wealthy as a member of Congress might be.

Still, putting any kind of teeth in preemption laws is a good thing. It’s something that every state should do, especially if they’re serious about protecting preemption.

If that doesn’t work, you can sharpen the teeth later, but this is a positive first step. Hopefully, it’ll be the only step needed, but if not, well, there are always future legislative cycles where this can be addressed.

I sincerely hope Ohio passes this.

Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.

Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.