AZAndy
Member
Judge Denies Teacher's Bid to Pack Heat on Campus
In a narrow decision that focuses largely on the definition of the word “ordinance,” an Oregon judge has rejected a teacher's challenge to a school district policy barring employees from packing concealed weapons on campus.
Shirley Katz sued her employer in September, arguing the policy is unenforceable since, under state law, the Legislature has sole authority to regulate guns and prohibits any “civil or criminal ordinances” enacted by a "county, city or other municipal corporation or district.”
The case presented a classic conflict between Katz's desire to protect herself from her ex-husband and the Medford School District's concerns over campus safety in the post-Columbine era. Katz, 44, has a concealed weapons permit and gun rights advocates are paying her legal fees.
But Jackson County Circuit Court Judge G. Philip Arnold steered clear of the hot-button issues in an order denying Katz's motion for a preliminary injunction.
“Plaintiff’s personal problems are not a factor in deciding the case,” he ruled. “Likewise, the wisdom of the District’s policy is not a factor in the case, nor are the potential problems which might arise if the statute prohibits the policy.”
The narrow issue for Arnold was one of statutory interpretation -– whether the district's weapons policy is an “ordinance” preempted by ORS 166.170. The statute does not define the term, but the judge used Black's Law Dictionary, which says, “In its most common meaning, the term is used to designate the enactments of the legislative body of a municipal corporation.”
“In this case, it is clear the District’s prohibition on weapons is contained in a school board employee policy, and is not an ordinance,” Arnold concluded. “By the very words of the statute, ORS 166.170(2) does not apply to school board policies ... Plaintiff's effort to insert another term, 'employment policies,' in the statute is inappropriate.”
Katz attorney James E. Leuenberger plans to appeal. “You can't call a horse a dog and get away with it,” he told The Oregonian. “They are prohibiting staff members from carrying weapons on school grounds. You can call it a policy all you want, you can call it algebra, it's still a law.”
But Leuenberger is relying on an antiquated Webster's definition of “ordinance” as “an established rule, policy, or practice.” And it is certainly a stretch to equate the term to workplace rules that do not affect the general public.
Arnold also noted that “the legislature uses the word 'policy' when it intends to refer to a policy and if the legislature is addressing both policies and ordinances, it clearly states both ... In ORS 166.170 the legislature used only the word 'ordinance,' and did not mention employment policies.”
Original article and associated documents here.
Last edited:
