Pennsylvania Supreme Court Considers Challenge to State’s Gun Law
In a significant legal battle, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has heard arguments challenging the state’s gun law, which prevents local governments from passing stricter regulations than those imposed by the state. The case, Crawford v. Commonwealth, was filed by the City of Philadelphia, Ceasefire PA, and co-victims, claiming that the state’s preemption statute from 1974 infringes upon the fundamental right to life and liberty as enshrined in the state constitution.
The plaintiffs argue that eliminating or narrowing preemption would allow cities like Philadelphia to implement laws such as permit-to-purchase measures, extreme risk protection orders, and monthly limits on handgun purchases. These changes are believed to potentially reduce homicides, mass shootings, and suicides.
Representing the plaintiffs, Jasmeet Ahuja contends that Article 1, Section 1 of the state Constitution grants the right to self-defense by legislation, empowering local municipalities to determine if they should have stricter gun laws.
However, in May 2022, the Commonwealth Court dismissed the case with a 3-2 decision, citing precedent from previous cases which deemed the state’s preemption laws constitutional. The plaintiffs appealed this decision, launching the current challenge before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
The plaintiffs are challenging the state’s preemption law on three fronts:
1. Violation of the right to self-defense by legislation.
2. Infringement upon the fundamental right to life and liberty.
3. The 1996 precedent in Ortiz v. Commonwealth does not adequately address the issue.
During the hearing, justices raised concerns about the court’s role in making policy decisions that should be handled by the General Assembly. Moreover, they noted the absence of explicit rights asserted by the plaintiffs in the state Constitution, unlike in previous landmark decisions.
Ahuja reassured the court that the proposed ordinances in Philadelphia would only impact unlawful gun ownership and not law-abiding citizens’ gun rights. The ordinances would require gun owners to obtain a city permit, impose a monthly limit on gun purchases, and enact a red flag law to restrict access to firearms for individuals deemed dangerous.
Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney expressed his support for the challenge, emphasizing that the state’s preemption laws have hindered the city’s ability to implement effective gun violence reduction policies. CeaseFirePA, a gun violence prevention organization, also voiced its support for the challenge and the need for laws to protect Pennsylvania communities.
Now, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will deliberate and decide whether the case will proceed to trial. This landmark decision will have significant implications for cities across the state, potentially giving them the power to enact their own firearm regulations. The court’s ruling will shape the future of gun control in Pennsylvania and could impact efforts to prevent gun violence.
