DeSantis signs law banning local governments from regulating guns
BY Herschel Smith
3 years, 6 months ago
TALLAHASSEE — Amid a legal battle that could be decided by the Florida Supreme Court, Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed a measure that will ratchet up a ban on local gun regulations.
DeSantis signed the bill (SB 1884) on Friday after the Republican-controlled Legislature passed it in party-line votes late last month. The bill, which will take effect July 1, will broaden a 2011 law that can make local governments pay as much as $100,000 in damages if they are sued for imposing gun regulations.
This is Florida’s preemption law, and this is a good thing. I’m impressed with DeSantis, but my next question is this: where is your open carry law, Ron?
I know you’re dealing with ninnies in the House and Senate, but you could do this if you wanted to. Simply refuse to sign all other bills that come to your desk until an open carry law comes your way, even at the threat of shutting down the government because of funding bills.
On May 11, 2021 at 5:41 pm, Archer said:
To clarify, Florida already had state preemption; localities were already prohibited from regulating guns more strictly than the state.
And it already had teeth; politicians who enact prohibited regulations could be fined in their individual capacities (i.e. the fines cannot be paid by their PACs or election coffers).
What has changed is this: If a person or organization sues the locality to challenge a prohibited regulation, the locality can no longer rescind the regulation to moot the lawsuit and avoid the consequences. If they do, the plaintiff is treated as the prevailing plaintiff — same as if they had won their lawsuit — and is entitled to attorney fees and damages up to $100k.
That’s it.
Don’t believe the media. Read the bill yourself. (The underlined portions are the new text. Less than half a page was added.)
Florida already had preemption, and their preemption already had teeth. This “new preemption bill” just sharpens the teeth a bit more.
But it should prevent New-York-style shenanigans, wherein they enact new regulation, get sued, rescind the regulation, get the case dismissed as moot, and then re-enact the regulation in a slightly-modified form that does much the same thing. IANAL, but I suspect that type of behavior was precisely the point of the new bill.