Wyoming considers Second Amendment Preservation Act

RJA1988 / Pixabay

Ever since Missouri passed the Second Amendment Preservation Act, a number of other states have considered similar measures.

Of course, Missouri’s law is facing a legal challenge, but that’s not deterring anyone from following their lead on this in the least.


The latest state to have such a bill introduced? Wyoming.

A bill that would attempt to block any state official or agency from enforcing laws deemed to violate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been filed in the Wyoming Legislature.

You can read Senate file 102 here.

The bill is sponsored by Sen. Larry Hicks [R-Albany, Carbon and Sweetwater Counties]. It’s co-sponsored by Sens. Cooper, Dockstader, Driskill, Kinskey, Kolb, Kost, Nethercott and, Steinmetz and Representative(s) Burkhart, Greear, Haroldson, Jennings, Olsen, and Styvar.

Now, Wyoming is a pretty pro-gun state, so this should be a slam dunk. Only, it’s not necessarily.

This current session is a budget session, which means any non-budgetary bills need a two-thirds majority vote in order to pass. That’s a pretty tall order, which is why such a majority is typically used as a significant legislative threshold.

However, if any state can make it happen, it may well be Wyoming.

The state Senate has 30 total seats with 28 of them being filled by Republicans. The House boasts 60 seats with 51 of them filled by Republicans. There’s also a Libertarian and an independent in there as well.

That’s right, there are a total of nine Democrats in the state legislature, which means they could well pull off a two-thirds majority.

But should they?

I’ve argued that it would be wiser to allow Missouri’s law to go through the legal challenge so as to tailor future bills around any court rulings. I still believe that.

However, I also have to acknowledge that I don’t see anything that says state or local law enforcement has to be required to enforce federal law. In fact, it’s hilarious that the people who thought immigration sanctuary cities were a swell idea.


After all, it’s basically the same idea. You’re not trying to nullify federal law, you’re just saying the feds are on their own for enforcing those laws.

If it’s acceptable for one set of circumstances, why is it suddenly an issue now?

As for Wyoming, we’ll have to see if this measure actually passes. While the makeup of the legislature is about as favorable as you’re ever going to see for such a thing, not every Republican is going to be comfortable with a bill like this.

The question becomes whether or not there will be so many of those that they scuttle the measure entirely.

There may also be those who don’t really have an issue with the bill, but who believe now isn’t the time for such a measure. They could pose a problem as well.

Of course, if just one person opposes it but is in such a position to make it so the bill never gets a vote, it doesn’t matter how much support it has.

As I said, we’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member