A judge in Fairfield County granted Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost‘s request for a temporary restraining order temporarily stopping Columbus’ new restrictive gun laws from going into effect for 14 days.
Judge Richard Berens issued the ruling Thursday morning, immediately enjoining the ordinances.
“This request of the court is strictly a matter of the law – as state law supersedes what Columbus is attempting to do here. The city has knowingly and deliberately overstepped its legislative authority,” Yost said.
On December 5th, the Columbus City Council passed a package of gun control legislation despite a judge’s order to cease any such action. This was related to Columbus’ legal challenge of an Ohio law mandating statewide uniformity in firearms regulation in 2019.
The measure includes a ban on magazines that hold 30 or more rounds by anyone other than a federal or state agent, armed services member, or a member of state or local law enforcement and mandatory firearm storage in the home. Also, it penalizes the straw sales of firearms when someone buys a gun to sell or gives it to someone prohibited from having one.
In 2006, the Ohio Legislature enacted Ohio Revised Code Section 9.68, commonly referred to as firearm “preemption.” This portion of state law specifically forbids cities and other political subdivisions from regulating firearms, their parts, ammunition, and knives.
“The issue here is that the legislature has said, ‘We’re going to have a uniform law for the entire state so that citizens don’t have to guess whether they’re breaking the law because they passed a municipal boundary – and that law needs to be enforced. If we’re going to have changes to Ohio’s gun laws, they need to go through the General Assembly,” Yost said.
According to Yost, the ban on large capacity magazines and making it a misdemeanor for not storing a firearm that complies with Columbus’ code violates the “uniformity law”. He continued that the storage aspects violate an individual’s right to bear arms.
“The individual right to bear arms would be illusory. If municipalities throughout the state had the power to enact local ordinances or regulations minimizing or circumscribing that right and cause citizens to have to play constitutional whack-a-mole while potentially facing jail time for exercising a fundamental right,” Yost’s request for the preliminary injunction said.
Columbus officials state that the home-rule provisions of Ohio’s constitution permit them to set gun policy. In two prior challenges to the state uniformity law, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld the law.
The case where Columbus sought a preliminary injunction against Ohio’s uniformity rule in 2019 inspired Yost to ask for an interim restraining order. The preliminary injunction was issued by Judge Steven McIntosh last month. The state submitted a note of appeal along with a request for an automatic stay of the preliminary injunction. The Tenth Appellate District is where this is currently pending.
McIntosh granted the state’s stay motion in full, staying “all proceedings.” The state looked to clarify the order.
Judge McIntosh issued his clarification on Wednesday after Yost had filed the injunction request in Fairfield County.
“The Court hereby STAYS all proceedings in this matter pending a final decision issued by the Tenth District Court of Appeals,” McIntosh wrote.
.- – –
Hannah Poling is a lead reporter at The Ohio Star and The Star News Network. Follow Hannah on Twitter @HannahPoling1. Email tips to [email protected].
Photo “Gun” by Elijah O’Donnell.
