|
|
|
Federal Court proceedings indicate possible 2nd Amendment occurrence may be coming in Tennessee.
Developments in the federal case of Beeler v. Skrmetti that is
pending in east Tennessee (Case No: 3:21-cv-152) indicate that something
very significant in the 2nd Amendment context may soon occur in
Tennessee. Those developments, once they are public, may indicate that
several Tennessee statutes, including several passed in the last 12
years by the Republican super majority in the Tennessee Legislature, may
violate the constitutional rights of Tennesseans.
The case started off under the name of Bassett v. Slatery.
The title has changed because of the substitution of parties, but its
the same case. The case was filed in April 2021, soon after the 2021
permitless carry law (which some have mischaracterized as a
“constitutional carry” law) was enacted. The permitless carry
legislation was filed in 2021 by Senator Jack Johnson and Rep. William
Lambert. However, it was treated as an “administration” bill because
Governor Lee had announced in 2020 that he was pushing for
constitutional carry to be enacted.
Tennessee Firearms
Association had opposed the legislation in 2020 and again in 2021
because of the numerous problems that it had relative to the 2nd
Amendment prohibition on government infringement of rights. Instead,
TFA support other legislation, filed by other legislators, which was
much more in line with true constitutional carry.
One of the
constitutional defects with the 2021 permitless carry law was that it
imposed unconstitutional restrictions regarding which individuals would
be able to rely on the affirmative defense that the 2021 permitless
carry law created by establishing numerous qualifications on which gun
owners could carry without a permit and which could not. One such
qualification was that the 2021 law allowed individuals in the age
bracket of 18-21 to carry a handgun without a permit but only if they
were in or honorably discharged from the military. (See, TCA Sec.
39-17-1307(g)). However, the law’s scheme meant that other 18-20 year
olds who did not have the designated military service would be subject
to criminal prosecution if they carried a handgun.
According to
the federal complaint, the differential treatment of 18-20 year olds
relative to the exercise of the rights protected by the 2nd Amendment
was unconstitutional and an equal protection violation. That is a
conclusion that TFA had asserted for years although the analysis fell on
deaf ears with the majority of GOP legislators and both of the state’s
recent Republican governors.
Until recently, the state of
Tennessee, while being represented by Attorney General Slatery, had
sought to have the federal case dismissed by asserting that the 2nd
Amendment did not prohibit the state of Tennessee from making such
choices regarding which citizens could be criminally prosecuted and
convicted for carrying a firearm and which would be “allowed” a defense
that they could raise to a jury if they were criminally charged.
Two
things have occurred in 2022 which may have changed the state’s
willingness to defend the decisions of the Governor and the Legislators
who sponsored and supported this legislation. The first change was the
US Supreme Court’s decision in the New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen
in June 2022 which reaffirmed what the court has previously said
concerning the fundamental application of the 2nd Amendment. The second
change was that Tennessee Attorney General Slatery retired and the
Tennessee Supreme Court appointed Mr. Skrmetti to succeed him.
Whatever
the cause, in the last 2 weeks that have been developments in the
federal case which suggest quite clearly that the state’s new Attorney
General is not willing to further defend the constitutionality of the
2021 permitless carry law, at least with respect to differential
treatment of 18-20 year olds who can otherwise legally purchase (through
casual sales), own and possess handguns.
On November 18, 2022,
the federal court issued an order staying the case for 60 days to
submit an agreed order since they had jointly represented to the court
that they “agreed on a path to resolution of the case that involves the
submission of an agreed order of judgment that would resolve the case in
its entirety.”
Given that the lawsuit is filed with the backing
of FPC, it is unlikely that the plaintiffs are agreeing to just concede
and agree with the state that the 2021 permitless carry law is
constitutional particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen.
Although
many things could happen, one possible and probable “path to
resolution” is that an order may be submitted where the parties agree
that 18-20 years olds must be treated the same – that is, without regard
to military service – under the 2nd Amendment. If that is ultimately
what happens, it could also render some or all of the State’s handgun
permitting statutes concerning eligibility for enhanced and/or concealed
permits constitutionally invalid.
If this is the path that
materializes, it will raise potentially other constitutional challenges –
deserved constitutional challenges to a broad spectrum of Tennessee’s
2nd Amendment infringing laws.
Stay Order
|
|
Executive Director
johnharris@tennesseefirearms.com
Joining and supporting TFA is an investment in the
fight to restore our constitutional rights and to fight against politicians who
are willing to sell their votes and your rights to whichever business interest
gives them the most money!
TFA Website: www.tennesseefirearms.com
| |
|
|
