Virginia: Roanoke ordinance may run afoul of state preemption statute

JohnPierce · Apr 21, 2012

Virginia is a Dillon Rule state. Under the Dillon Rule, municipalities have powers that are strictly limited.

Where possession, transportation, and carrying of firearms and ammunition are concerned, the Virginia Legislature has left no question as to the ability of municipalities to regulate the field. They cannot. The legislature has specifically preempted the entire field under § 15.2-915 of the Code of Virginia.

Ordinances passed in violation of preemption are void and unenforcable. But they do serve the purpose for which they are intended. They make citizens afraid to engage in conduct that is both legal and affirmatively protected by state law. They exert a “chilling effect” on the exercise of citizens’ rights.

Which leads us to an analysis of the Roanoke County ordinance in question …

Excerpt ... Read more

Bubbles · Apr 21, 2012

We here in WV are well aware of how the Florida legislature put some teeth into their pre-emption law, and are working on getting something similar into our laws.

JohnPierce · Apr 22, 2012

Bubbles said:
We here in WV are well aware of how the Florida legislature put some teeth into their pre-emption law, and are working on getting something similar into our laws.

We need to duplicate the Florida effort here in Virginia as well.

Deanimator · Apr 22, 2012

Ohio also has preemption of firearms laws. Cleveland tried that nonsense a while back and took the kind of beating in court that Bruce Willis took in "Last Man Standing". Frank Jackson still walks with a limp.

Ohioans for Concealed Carry keeps an eye on preemption violations and jumps on them hard, bringing suit where necessary. VCDL has an even tougher reputation.

HOOfan_1 · Apr 22, 2012

They keep saying allowed by statute, yet they don't deem it necessary to say specifically WHAT STATUTE...

brickeyee · Apr 22, 2012

This is Virginia's preemption statute.

The "expressly authorized by statute' referred is STATE statute, not local.

Only those powers directly granted to a sub-municipality by the STATE are allowed.

Some local yodel attorney is asking to be smacked down.

A letter form the state AG should do the job.

§ 15.2-915. Control of firearms; applicability to authorities and local governmental agencies.

A. No locality shall adopt or enforce any ordinance, resolution or motion, as permitted by § 15.2-1425, and no agent of such locality shall take any administrative action, governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, storage or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof other than those expressly authorized by statute. For purposes of this section, a statute that does not refer to firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, shall not be construed to provide express authorization.

Nothing in this section shall prohibit a locality from adopting workplace rules relating to terms and conditions of employment of the workforce. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a law-enforcement officer, as defined in § 9.1-101 from acting within the scope of his duties.

The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency, but not including any local or regional jail or juvenile detention facility.

B. Any local ordinance, resolution or motion adopted prior to the effective date of this act governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, other than those expressly authorized by statute, is invalid.

C. In addition to any other relief provided, the court may award reasonable attorney fees, expenses, and court costs to any person, group, or entity that prevails in an action challenging (i) an ordinance, resolution, or motion as being in conflict with this section or (ii) an administrative action taken in bad faith as being in conflict with this section.

(1987, c. 629, § 15.1-29.15; 1988, c. 392; 1997, cc. 550, 587; 2002, c. 484; 2003, c. 943; 2004, cc. 837, 923; 2009, cc. 735, 772.)

HOOfan_1 · Apr 22, 2012

brickeyee said:
A letter form the state AG should do the job.

Cuccinellii is big on second amendment rights and he is big on enforcing Dillon Rule

Virginia: Roanoke ordinance may run afoul of state preemption statute

JohnPierce

Member

Bubbles

Member

JohnPierce

Member

Deanimator

Member

HOOfan_1

Member

brickeyee

Member

HOOfan_1

Member

Similar threads