Legislator Reloads Bill Allowing NRA To Sue Over Local Gun Laws

By Andrew Staub | PA Independent

Legislative gymnastics doomed a 2014 law that allowed interest groups such as the National Rifle Association to sue local municipalities over their firearms ordinances, but a central Pennsylvania lawmaker is reloading the legislation.

State Rep. Mark Keller, R-Perry, plans to reintroduce it as a standalone bill after the Commonwealth Court ruled last month the General Assembly violated the state constitution when it attached the law to a bill about scrap-metal theft.  Pennsylvania’s constitution limits most legislation to a single subject.

Passing the bill on its own will alleviate the problem, Keller said, stressing the content of the legislation was not the issue.

“It wasn’t thrown out because it was bad legislation or unconstitutional,” Keller said of the gun-related legislation. “That wasn’t the factor, so don’t let people hang their hat on that issue.”

Plus, Keller noted, the state already has a preemption law that says “no county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.”

Supporters believe the law would stop the proliferation of patchwork gun regulations that could make law-abiding gun owners criminals when they visit a municipality and are unaware of different ordinances.

EARLIER: Lawmakers grant NRA standing to sue over local gun laws

Critics have accused lawmakers, who passed the law in late October, of giving a powerful interest group a pre-election gift. The NRA didn’t hesitate to take advantage, either, suing Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Lancaster over their local regulations not long after the bill became law. A different group sued Harrisburg.

The law included a controversial perk. In addition to granting the NRA or similar groups standing to sue over local gun ordinances that reach beyond state law, the legislation allowed successful plaintiffs to collect damages and expenses, but didn’t make them pay a municipality if they lost in court.

That meant, regardless of the outcome, municipalities and their taxpayers would be on the hook for expensive legal fees, said Shira Goodman, executive director of CeaseFirePA, which describes itself as a “statewide coalition of mayors, police chiefs, faith leaders, community organizations, and individual Pennsylvanians working together to take a stand against gun violence.”

“Even if you win, you’re going to pay for it, and if you lose, you’re really going to pay for it,” Goodman said. “It was like a bully thing.”

And effective. Rather than face a court challenge, Allentown eliminated its ban on weapons in city parks and tossed out an ordinance requiring that gun owners report lost or stolen firearms. Others followed suit.

The NRA did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Keller’s proposal, but a spokesperson has previously said local government officials should simply stop passing ordinances that exceed state law.

Some municipalities, such as Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, have stood firm despite litigation. Both have ordinances that require the reporting of lost or stolen firearms, among other regulations.

Philadelphia would oppose Keller’s anticipated legislation, said Mark McDonald, a spokesman for Mayor Michael Nutter.

“We believe that local laws like the lost or stolen ordinance that attempt to reduce the role that straw purchasers play in the proliferation of handguns in the city are important,” he said in an email.

Keller’s legislation, though yet to be introduced, would be nearly identical to the struck-down law.

However, one change would require that municipalities receive written notice 30 days before a legal challenge is filed, giving them time to voluntarily repeal gun regulations. Keller doesn’t want cities, boroughs and townships to feel as if he is proposing “gotcha” legislation.

“It’s giving fair warning,” he said.

Goodman appreciates that change, but said CeaseFirePA still believes it’s bad legislation that would face an uphill battle the second time around. Allowing somebody to sue, even if they haven’t been aggrieved by a local law, is a “dangerous” shift, she said.

Prompted by a lawsuit from five Democratic lawmakers, the Commonwealth Court’s decision was a big blow to the law.

After legislators rushed the bill to his desk, former Gov. Tom Corbett, a Republican, signed it into law, but he lost to current Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, in November’s election. Wolf criticized the bill during the campaign.

“The governor has been clear in his opposition to this law and feels the court got it right,” said Jeffrey Sheridan, Wolf’s press secretary.

When asked what Wolf would do if the bill reached his desk, Sheridan said he would not speculate on a legislation that’s yet to be introduced.

Yet Keller reiterated the bill fell because of technical flaws and said he’s received bipartisan support so far.

“Everybody knows what the state law is,” Keller said, “and that’s what they should follow.”