Last November, voters in Memphis overwhelmingly approved three local gun control ordinances, but those measures aren't likely to take effect anytime soon. Tennessee's firearms preemption law makes it clear that localities don't have the authority to set their own gun laws, and the "red flag" law, "assault weapon" ban, and local repeal of the state's permitless carry law won't take effect unless or until the preemption law is itself repealed by the state legislature. 

That's not stopping Tennessee House Speaker Cameron Sexton from proposing new legislation that targets efforts to undo or ignore the state's preemption law. Sexton 

"The Tennessee Constitution is clear – the legislature has oversight of cities and counties," Speaker Cameron Sexton said in a statement. "If local governments refuse to follow state law or circumvent state laws, they should not expect to benefit from state resources. This legislation makes it clear that political stunts will not be tolerated at the expense of law-abiding Tennesseans."

Sexton and Lt. Gov. Randy McNally in August promised to punish Memphis by cutting its share of sales tax revenue – more than $75 million – if the city put referendums on the November ballot restricting weapons. 

So far that hasn't happened either, but that could change if Sexton's proposal becomes law. The speaker wants to give legislators the authority to ask the state Attorney General to investigate any political subdivision that has adopted a questionable ordinance. If the AG finds that the state's preemption law is being violated, the locality would have 30 days to strike the offending ordinance from statute. If a city or county decides to flagrantly ignore the AG, teh state of Tennessee would then be empowered to withhold any (or all) state-issued funds to that locality, not just those related to the statewide sales tax. 

Democratic Sen. London Lamar of Memphis called the bill an "affront to the separation of powers" taught in elementary schools.

"The attorney general doesn't have the authority to choose which laws are constitutional and which ones aren't. The power belongs to the courts," Lamar said. "Let's get back to work solving real issues – instead of creating legal problems."

Please. The gun control referendum was an affront to the separation of powers. Sexton's proposal is basically just putting some teeth in the preemption law. As for Lamar's contention that the Attorney General isn't responsible for determining what laws are constitutional or not, that's not what the AG is tasked with under the legislation in question. The Attorney General's office wouldn't weigh in on whether a gun law violates the Tennessee constitution or the Second Amendment. Instead, it would decide whether or not a particular ordinance runs afoul of the state's preemption statute, and that's well within the AG's existing authority. 

In fact, Tennessee statute requires the Attorney General to provide written legal opinions to "the governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, comptroller of the treasury, members of the general assembly and other state officials" upon request. Sexton's proposal doesn't grant the AG any new powers. Instead, it provides a new legislative mechanism for punishing those political subdivisions who, as the Speaker says, engage in stunts at the ballot box that are designed to flout state law. 

Since the Memphis referendums were written in such a way that they can't take effect unless preemption goes away, it's unclear whether or not the city would actually be in line to lose any revenue if Sexton's bill does become law. My biggest concern about what Sexton is proposing is that if cities can still avoid punishment by writing these referendums in a way that doesn't trigger an AG investigation, Sexton's bill might actually encourage other Democrat-controlled cities and counties to follow the lead of Memphis lawmakers. 

It would truly be ironic if Sexton's proposal ended up putting more of these resolutions before on the ballot in Democrat strongholds, and the GOP majority in both the House and Senate need to think long and hard about any unintended consequences that might come along with Sexton's attempt to strengthen the state's preemption law. 

I appreciate the intent behind Sexton's proposed legislation. I'm just not convinced it's the best way to bring anti-gun lawmakers to heel. After all, even residents who oppose attempts to enshrine local gun controls would be punished if Sexton's proposal becomes law. 

Instead of targeting the cities and counties that adopt ordinances in violation of the state's firearm preemption law, another approach would be to do what Florida's done: allow individual office holders to be fined or removed from office by the governor if they enact or cause any local ordinance or administrative rule or regulation that violates Tennessee's firearm preemption law to be enforced. That would be a much more targeted effort than what Sexton's proposing, and honestly, it would probably have a bigger impact on anti-gun lawmakers than stripping cities of tax revenue dispensed by the state.