Story by Spotlight PA’s Katie Meyer
Investigative and public service journalism produced by the independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit newsroom Spotlight PA holds Pennsylvania’s leaders accountable and promotes constructive change.Subscribe to our newsletters for free.
HARRISBURG Although Philadelphia and other cities’ attempts to enact tougher gun laws were thwarted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, supporters say their battle is far from done.
They’re getting ready to keep arguing for stricter gun laws in the courts and in the split state legislature.
One of 42 states, including Pennsylvania, has a provision that prohibits local governments from enacting or implementing gun laws that are more stringent than those permitted by the legislature. Big city leaders have long been offended by this, claiming that their jurisdictions have particular public safety requirements that call for separate legislation.
The commonwealth was sued in 2021 by the city of Philadelphia, the anti-violence organization CeaseFirePA, and others who claimed that Pennsylvanians’ constitutional rights to life and liberty were violated by the state preemption statute. In a unanimous ruling, the Texas Supreme Court dismissed the argument.
Pittsburgh also asked the justices to rule on a number of delayed local gun restrictions, including a ban on assault rifles, in a preemption case that it appealed to the high court. According to city officials, the lawsuit is probably over.
Adam Garber, executive director of CeaseFirePA, said he still believes there are legal ways to directly challenge the preemption statute in spite of the ruling.
In particular, other pending cases question whether the preemption statute extends to local governments that control the reporting of lost or stolen firearms or the selling of ghost gun parts kits for building untraceable handguns at home. While it examined Crawford v. Commonwealth, the high court postponed them.
We’re just saying, ‘This isn’t about firearms,’ in each of those situations, Garber said. Sections that aren’t preempted or individuals who aren’t legally in possession of firearms are at issue here, and those laws ought to be upheld.
He went on to remark that the state Supreme Court in Crawford made no mention of all laws being preempted. Therefore, we strongly advise them to take into account the fact that there are policies that they ought to permit that are not covered by state statutes.
Now that the state Supreme Court has decided that the preemption remains in place, state lawmakers who favor stricter gun legislation are feeling more pressure to use the legislative process, even though legal options may not be exhausted.
State Representative Tim Briggs (D., Montgomery), who chairs the committee that approves the majority of gun laws in the state House, stated that while it is concerning that the court has ruled against municipalities making their own decisions on public safety, the decision is final.
The legislature must now continue the fight, once more implement effective gun violence prevention policies backed by the vast majority of Pennsylvanians, and produce outcomes that satisfy the constitution, he told Spotlight PA.
During the most recent two-year legislative session, three significant gun-related laws were passed by the state House, which is heavily favored by Democrats.
One is called the “ared flag law,” which would give judges the authority to issue extreme risk protection orders and confiscate firearms from anyone who are thought to pose a risk to themselves or others. Another would eliminate the long-standing exemption for private sales of long weapons and mandate background checks for all gun purchases. Ghost gun kits would be prohibited by the third.
The legislation were not considered by the state Senate, which is controlled by Republicans.
The chair of the upper chamber’s Judiciary Committee, state senator Lisa Baker (R., Luzerne), has stated that she is amenable to certain gun-related legislation. She claimed to have advocated for constitutional, enforceable, and workable legislative measures following a series of hearings on mental health and firearms held by her committee in 2019.
In a statement last year, Baker claimed that proposals that Democrats had pushed to broaden background checks and permit the temporary confiscation of firearms did not live up to her standards.
At the time, Baker stated, “I think the modernization of the mental health procedures law as it relates to gun rights would more appropriately address the issue of helping individuals in crisis to ensure that those in need of treatment receive it and that due process is maintained.”
A request for comment on any proposals Baker might support in the session that starts in 2025 was not answered by a Baker official.
Although gun control legislation is more likely to pass the lower house, this is not a given.
Bills requiring safe gun storage in homes with children, penalizing parents who allow a minor to possess a firearm, prohibiting the sale of assault-style weapons, regulating 3D-printed firearms similarly to ordinary firearms, and shortening the time frame for judges to alert State Police to mental health conditions that should prevent someone from possessing a firearm were among the many initiatives that failed during the previous session.
Some, such as a bill requiring gun owners to notify authorities more promptly of lost or stolen firearms, were defeated by a single vote.
Others prevailed by comparable slim margins. Three Republicans from the suburbs supported the plan to outlaw ghost weapons, whereas just two Republicans supported the red flag bill.
With nine Republican votes in favor, support for the universal background check was marginally stronger. (The conservative Democrat in the chamber voted against all three.)
According to Garber of CeaseFirePA, policymakers ought to take note of the state House bills that have been successful. Specifically, he believes there is potential for agreement on policies aimed at reducing gun trafficking or violent crime.
“I think there’s real hope [that] Republicans, who are often saying they want to back the blue and back law enforcement, will step up when we talk about policies that address gun trafficking and guns used in violent crime, like ghost guns,” Garber added.
He believes that marrying the things that both parties care about will be the trick.
There are, in my opinion, numerous instances where initiatives have garnered great support from both parties, from the law enforcement community, and from Republicans who can argue, “Look, we have to deal with this particular aspect of the crisis.” It has nothing to do with your ability to carry a firearm for self-defense or hunting.
Stephen Caruso of Spotlight PA provided reporting assistance.
PRIOR TO GOINGPay it forward by making a donation to Spotlight PA atspotlightpa.org/donate if this article taught you anything. Foundations and readers like you who support results-driven, accountability journalism provide funding for Spotlight PA.
Stories from Spotlight PA
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!