The strange tale of Memphis city officials attempting to get three anti-gun questions on the November ballot despite the proposals violating Tennessee’s firearms pre-emption law has taken a new twist.
As we reported in late July, Memphis city leaders approved several anti-gun measures to appear on the ballot on election day in an attempt to amend the city charter, despite Republican state lawmakers threatening to withhold millions of dollars of state funding if they proceeded with the scheme. Then, in August the state election commission announced it would not place the questions on the ballot because the Secretary of State’s office had warned that they violated several state laws, making them ineligible.
In the latest strange twist, a judge ruled on September 11 that the gun-control questions can appear on the November ballot because they are just proposals and have not yet amended the city’s charter.
Question Number 1 is an end run around the state’s recently passed constitutional carry law. That measure asks voters whether or not the City of Memphis charter should be amended so that no person can legally carry, store or travel with a handgun in the city without a valid carry permit—the exact thing state law allows.
It would further amend the charter to read: “It shall be unlawful for a person to store a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or firearm ammunition, in a motor vehicle or boat while the person is not in the motor vehicle of boat unless the firearm or firearm ammunition is kept from ordinary observation and locked in the trunk, utility or glove box, or a locked container securely affixed to the motor vehicle or boat.” Of course, the language does not define “ordinary observation.”
Question Number 2 deals with so-called “assault weapons.” It specifically asks if the city charter should be amended to ban common semi-auto firearms, and whether the charter should outlaw the sale of such firearms.
“The citizens of Memphis hereby find and declare that the proliferation and use of assault weapons pose a threat to the health, safety, and security of all citizens of Memphis,” the question states.
The final measure—Question Number 3—would set up a process for a city red-flag law. Of course, like most such proposals it likely wouldn’t protect the due process rights of gun owners who might suddenly find their Second Amendment rights restricted.
It’s hard to understand what Memphis leaders are thinking as it is clear the proposed questions run afoul of the state’s firearms preemption law. That law states: “The general assembly preempts the whole field of the regulation of firearms, ammunition, or components of firearms or ammunition, or combinations thereof including, but not limited to, the use, purchase, transfer, taxation, manufacture, ownership, possession, carrying, sale, acquisition, gift, devise, licensing, registration, storage, and transportation thereof, to the exclusion of all county, city, town, municipality, or metropolitan government law, ordinances, resolutions, enactments or regulation.”
The law further states: “No county, city, town, municipality, or metropolitan government nor any local agency, department, or official shall occupy any part of the field regulation of firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or ammunition, or combinations thereof.”
The threat by Republican lawmakers to withhold state funding is not one to be taking lightly. Last year, Memphis received nearly $78 million of its $858 million budget from the state’s sales tax revenue.
