Alabama lawmakers pass bill meant to block Biden orders

AP Photo/Andrew Selsky, File

Alabama is a very pro-gun state. They just passed constitutional carry earlier this year, for example, and it seems lawmakers there aren’t interested in resting on their laurels. They’re still trying to make pro-Second Amendment moves.


In fact, they just passed another law that’s bound to rustle the proverbial jimmies of the gun control crowd.

Alabama lawmakers have passed a bill intended to block state and local officials from enforcing executive orders by the president that restrict ownership or use of firearms.

The bill by Sen. Gerald Allen, R-Tuscaloosa, is called the Alabama Second Amendment Protection Act.

Allen and other Republican lawmakers have proposed similar bills since President Biden took office last year.

Democrats opposed the bill, questioning the purpose and practicality of the bill and citing the Supremacy Clause, which holds that federal law generally supersedes state law.

Rep. David Standridge, R-Hayden, the House sponsor of the bill, said people in Alabama are concerned about the possibility of presidential orders on firearms.

Standridge has said he believes states can decide whether state and local police enforce presidential orders. That state authority does not apply to federal officers, he has said.

And Standridge makes a valid point. After all, the law doesn’t dictate what laws are in effect within the state of Alabama’s borders, only what state and local law enforcement do with regard to those laws.


This will probably spark a legal challenge much like how Missouri’s SAPA did, but there are differences between the two measures.

Frankly, though, I’m not interested in hearing criticism of this measure from anyone who supports sanctuary measures at the state level for illegal immigrants. After all, this is fundamentally no different than those laws, really. The only difference is what is being tolerated.

Of course, for far too many anti-gun jihadists, guns are different. The rules are different and they should be free to enact whatever legislation they want, at least in their minds.

The thing is, that’s not how it works. Any tactic you try is fair game for someone else to give a go. Sure, what works in one policy arena may not work in another, but you can’t pretend to be offended when someone gives it a go.

So, Alabama did.

Now we’ll just have to wait for what the courts say. I suspect we’ll see similar arguments to what we’ll see in Missouri, but in the end, it doesn’t matter.

Even a decision that comes down against the Second Amendment will ultimately hurt the Democrats who are pushing this stuff. Instead of just winning for gun control, they’ll manage to epitomize the statement, “Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.”


However, truth be told, I don’t see that happening. Laws aren’t being nullified and insisting police enforce federal executive orders amounts to an unfunded mandate, which is problematic as well.

In the end, I suspect the law will fly and I suspect we’ll see a number of other states pass similar measures in short order.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member