Saturday, January 14, 2017

FL: Tallahassee Mayor Claims Power to ignore State Law

In Florida, the State government has chosen to protect residents rights to keep and bear arms by restricting the actions that local governments can take.  This is call preemption, and it means that only the State can pass laws restriction the carry, possession, and use of guns.  It insures that the laws regarding guns and firearms use are uniform across the state. People exercising their right to keep and carry weapons will not have to guess about whether they are violating an obscure local ordinance when they cross some unmarked local boundary. Every state has some form of firearms preemption law on the books. Some are more protective than others.

Many Florida local governments chose to ignore the law. They kept illegal ordinances on the books, and even threatened prosecution of individuals, although the ordinances themselves were illegitimate.

The Florida legislature responded by providing penalties for individuals in local governments who chose to ignore and violate the preemption law. From
The mayor refers to the law as “super-preemption.” Like state preemption laws across the country, including North Carolina’s notorious H.B. 2, Florida’s firearms statute forbids city or county governments from passing certain local policies—in this case, laws regulating the sale or use of firearms. But Florida’s law goes much further: It opens up local government officials to lawsuits, penalties, fees, and even removal from office for even attempting to pass a bill contravening state law.
Recently, the city of Tallahassee was sued to remove laws that violate the preemption ordinance from their books.  It is a remedy the preemption law provides to bring cities that openly defy the law into compliance.  Mayor Gillum has chosen to openly defy the preemption statute and challenge it in court. Mayor Gillum is a rising star in the Democrat party.  He spoke at the Democrat national convention.

The first district court of appeals must consider whether the city went afoul of the law when it left a pair of provisions regulating gun use on the books. Eric Friday, general counsel for the gun rights organization Florida Carry says the law is clear.

“These officials took swore an oath and took a job to follow the laws of Florida and the’ve chosen not to do so. They have chosen, or they have stated here, that they want to continue to regulate fire arms whether the legislature tells them they can or cannot,” Friday says.

But city attorneys argue the state’s preemption law violates city commissioners’ rights under the state constitution. Lauren Lennon says that’s because it violates the commissioners’ legislative immunity by carrying penalties and fines, even allowing them to be personally sued based on how they vote.
It is the duty of state legislators to keep local officials in check. Local governments are creatures of the State. States are independent of the Federal government because of the structure of the Constitution, where the checks and balances in the power structure are defined. States have some powers, but not unlimited. The federal government has some powers, but not unlimited. Individuals have rights, but not unlimited. Local governments are creatures of the State.

Elected officials do not have immunity to violate peoples rights. That principle has been well established in federal law, in Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242. From

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
In the Florida pre-emption case, the State of Florida is saying that local officials do not have the authority to vote to violate individual rights, and that they can be held to account if they do so.  Voting to put someone's rights in danger is a little different than arresting someone for exercising their rights. It is the predicate act to doing so.

It may be a few months before the case is decided in the courts.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch


Anonymous said...

Preemption is actually usurpation of the Second Amendment. With Preemption, state law controls, not the federal right at issue here - the right to arms.

Preemption is a huge mistake and it is as much a fallacy as are the permission slip structures themselves. This line of thinking may have made sense prior to Heller and prior to McDonald especially, but the game has changed. Arguing preemption is arguing about the apples when the car was repossessed. It is nonsense! It is distraction and it is destructive.

Cementing State power over the right to arms as a means of slamming a mayor is not the right angle, not the Rights angle. We must stand for the Second Amendment, not state control over it, not preemption of the Second Amendment by state government. The violation of the Second Amendment is what should control this mayor.

Anonymous said...

Any one read the Oath of office and understand what it says and what it does not say. It says enforce the laws to the best of their ability. it does not say enforce all that they agree with nor does it say as I see fit or decide to change as I please.

I think there is recourse that has been failed to be enforced for many decades. violating the oath of office requires impeachment and removal from office. that is how we legally hold elected or appointed government officials responsible for the money we pay them.

They should be removed from office for any violations of their oath. it should be immediate and effective.

If a politician is so irresponsible they think they are immune then they do not belong in any office. the people are the government we must stand up and demand compliance.

I have always been upset with the Clinton impeachment fiasco. the constitution clearly states shall impeach and REMOVE. Nothing is written about accepting a plea bargain. Clinton disgraced our nation. If he had been impeached and removed from office the Clinton foundation would not exist. the legislators that refused to remove him should have been recalled. this nation had better get serious about enforcing the power of the people to limit government.

I have been to Washington D.C., get away from the monuments areas and you see high rent slums. The fa├žade of Washington is just as disgusting as Bill Clintons lack of integrity and moral decorum.

All of this business about Trump and his business interests is B/S. Our first president George Washington was in fact a rich Hemp farmer. In those days they raised Hemp to make rope not smoke.

There is a very serious law in this country it is called the sedition act. If Obama CONTINUES TO INTERFERE WITH THE TRUMP ADMINSTRATION, He and his followers should be charged with sedition and expelled from this country. Attempts to undermine the government of this country is SEDITION. I think the sedition act needs to be looked at very carefully. I believe Obama is already guilty of sedition. Joe McCarthy was a man before his time.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous one is thinking like me. the word games they play are used to confuse the issue, the real issue is never addressed. federal right verses State infringement. claiming states rights when no states rights exist for this issue. One executive order from a man that claims to be a constitutionalist should clear up this issue once and for all. State second amendment infringing laws are repugnant to the federal constitution Period double period. then shrink the government by getting rid of the ATF. the only license any one should need to sell arms is a tax license for retail sales. there is no need to qualify for any thing except prove you are free to walk the streets, human and entitled to self defense. If this is not true then get in line to get your license or permit to post any thing. we have laws to control libel, tell the truth for get sued.