http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...gun+opponents+ask+Supreme+Court+for+rehearing
Concealed gun opponents ask Supreme Court for rehearing
By Jim Suhr
Associated Press
ST. LOUIS (AP) -- St. Louis County was finalizing a lawsuit Friday to challenge the state's new concealed guns law on the grounds it is an unfunded mandate, a legal official said.
"The county is being asked to provide a new service, issuing these permits, but the state hasn't provided the county with the money to do it as required by the Hancock Amendment," said county counselor Pat Redington. Redington said the suit would be filed in the next few days, but could not say exactly when or in what court.
St. Louis County police said Thursday they'll continue to refuse applications to carry concealed guns due to the plans by Missouri's largest county to file suit.
The police announcement came the same day concealed gun opponents asked the Missouri Supreme Court for a rehearing on their claim that the state has illegally failed to provide the full funding.
The Supreme Court on Feb. 26 upheld the Legislature's right to legalize concealed guns, but the high court declared the law could impose an unfunded mandate on counties, barred in the so-called Hancock Amendment to the Missouri Constitution.
The court specifically exempted four of the state's 114 counties -- Jackson, Cape Girardeau, Camden and Greene -- that had presented evidence of their costs in carrying out the law. But the ruling essentially laid out a roadmap for other counties to raise the same claims.
Since then, some sheriffs have begun taking concealed gun applications while others have held off.
In a statement Thursday, St. Louis County police said that "although some counties in Missouri may accept applications," Redington has "prepared a challenge to the issuance of concealed-carry endorsements in St. Louis County."
St. Louis County authorities have not accepted applications "mainly in order not to waste citizens' time or our own if (Redington's challenge) is held up on appeal," police Lt. Gary Berra said.
In its 5-2 decision last month, the Supreme County majority interpreted the law as limiting expenditure of a $100 application fee to law enforcement equipment and training -- effectively preventing sheriffs from using the money for personnel or other processing costs. The court said such a restriction was a violation of the unfunded mandate prohibition contained in the so-called Hancock Amendment to the Missouri Constitution.
But the court majority said the plaintiffs had not challenged the validity of whether charging a local fee met the constitutional requirement to provide "full state financing" for the sheriffs' new activities. Consequently, the majority said it wasn't addressing that issue.
In their motion for rehearing, plaintiffs attorneys Burton Newman and Richard Miller said they had "repeatedly raised the allegation that the state failed to fully fund the mandate called for" by the concealed guns law.
Chief Justice Ronnie White, in his dissent to the Feb. 26 opinion, argued that the constitutional requirement for full state funding meant the state must appropriate money from its budget, not just authorize a local fee. White said he would have exempted all counties from having to carry out the law until the Legislature provided a specific state appropriation.
Concealed gun opponents ask Supreme Court for rehearing
By Jim Suhr
Associated Press
ST. LOUIS (AP) -- St. Louis County was finalizing a lawsuit Friday to challenge the state's new concealed guns law on the grounds it is an unfunded mandate, a legal official said.
"The county is being asked to provide a new service, issuing these permits, but the state hasn't provided the county with the money to do it as required by the Hancock Amendment," said county counselor Pat Redington. Redington said the suit would be filed in the next few days, but could not say exactly when or in what court.
St. Louis County police said Thursday they'll continue to refuse applications to carry concealed guns due to the plans by Missouri's largest county to file suit.
The police announcement came the same day concealed gun opponents asked the Missouri Supreme Court for a rehearing on their claim that the state has illegally failed to provide the full funding.
The Supreme Court on Feb. 26 upheld the Legislature's right to legalize concealed guns, but the high court declared the law could impose an unfunded mandate on counties, barred in the so-called Hancock Amendment to the Missouri Constitution.
The court specifically exempted four of the state's 114 counties -- Jackson, Cape Girardeau, Camden and Greene -- that had presented evidence of their costs in carrying out the law. But the ruling essentially laid out a roadmap for other counties to raise the same claims.
Since then, some sheriffs have begun taking concealed gun applications while others have held off.
In a statement Thursday, St. Louis County police said that "although some counties in Missouri may accept applications," Redington has "prepared a challenge to the issuance of concealed-carry endorsements in St. Louis County."
St. Louis County authorities have not accepted applications "mainly in order not to waste citizens' time or our own if (Redington's challenge) is held up on appeal," police Lt. Gary Berra said.
In its 5-2 decision last month, the Supreme County majority interpreted the law as limiting expenditure of a $100 application fee to law enforcement equipment and training -- effectively preventing sheriffs from using the money for personnel or other processing costs. The court said such a restriction was a violation of the unfunded mandate prohibition contained in the so-called Hancock Amendment to the Missouri Constitution.
But the court majority said the plaintiffs had not challenged the validity of whether charging a local fee met the constitutional requirement to provide "full state financing" for the sheriffs' new activities. Consequently, the majority said it wasn't addressing that issue.
In their motion for rehearing, plaintiffs attorneys Burton Newman and Richard Miller said they had "repeatedly raised the allegation that the state failed to fully fund the mandate called for" by the concealed guns law.
Chief Justice Ronnie White, in his dissent to the Feb. 26 opinion, argued that the constitutional requirement for full state funding meant the state must appropriate money from its budget, not just authorize a local fee. White said he would have exempted all counties from having to carry out the law until the Legislature provided a specific state appropriation.
