The way preemption works is that any local gun control has to be passed at the state level. It's theoretically possible for that to happen, too. Philadelphia has some gun laws specific to the city, after all, and Pennsylvania is a preemption state. The state legislature passed those laws, so they're binding and legal under preemption.
But are they constitutional under the state's constitution?
Well, maybe and maybe not. While it would be easy to say they're unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, that's not how it's being looked at. Instead, a challenge against those carry laws in Philadelphia is going before the state supreme court as a violation of equal protection.
A Philadelphia man’s conviction for openly carrying a gun has led Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court to reexamine a state law that treats firearm owners in the state’s largest city differently than in other parts of the commonwealth.
To carry a gun in Philadelphia, a person must have a concealed carry license, regardless of whether they carry it openly or not. That’s not a requirement in the state’s 66 other counties, where it’s legal to carry a gun without a permit as long as it’s plainly visible.
Lawyers for Zaire Livingston have argued the state Uniform Firearms Act’s exception for Philadelphia violates the equal protection provisions of the state and federal constitutions.
...Police arrested Riyaadh Sumpter after officers spotted him walking on a street with the grip of a handgun visibly protruding from his waistband. He was charged with and convicted of violating Section 6108 of the Uniform Firearms Act.
On appeal, the panel found the law unconstitutional on an equal protection basis, because it places people in Philadelphia at a “special disadvantage in the exercise of their Second Amendment right.” Prosecutors failed to show a compelling interest that was served by the restriction that would justify the infringement of Sumpter’s right to bear arms, the decision said.
The disagreement within the Superior Court, the commonwealth’s frontline appeals court, would be reason enough for the Supreme Court to review the cases, Craig Storrs, executive director of Pennsylvania Gun Rights, said.
Basically, it boils down to the fact that since Philadelphia has special laws regarding the lawful carry of firearms, it creates an uneven application of gun rights.
At least, that's how I understand it.
And, honestly, I can see it.
Part of the reason for preemption is that it creates a uniform set of gun laws throughout a state. If a city, even one like Philadelphia, gets an exemption--even if it's because of a vote in the state legislature--then there is no longer a uniform set of laws throughout the state. Visitors to the City of Brotherly Love may well be ignorant that there is a different set of rules that apply there, thus getting them jammed up because they didn't know.
The rule is that ignorance of the law is no defense, but with so many laws in any given location, it's impossible for anyone to know them all. Even attorneys need their own libraries just to keep up with everything.
So I can see an equal protection argument here, because the rules are unequal.
It'll be interesting to see how this case breaks down, but I'm hopeful folks in Philly will get some relief from what they're having to endure.
Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.
Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member