Lawsuit over Florida Preemption

I should note that I love the Florida preemption law, and reactions like this are exactly the reason why:

Any such ordinances could be challenged in court. If a judge agrees that a violation has occurred, the offending commissioners could be punished as a group and individually by a fine as much as $5,000.

As expected, the media and local politicians who have been flaunting state preemption for years with no repercussions, have been foaming at the mouth ever since this bill was passed in Florida. I’ve probably seen at least an article every couple of days condemning it. That’s a good sign we need to bring this idea to other states, like Pennsylvania, who have plenty of local worms who pretend preemption is a mere suggestion, to be ignored at their whim.

Palm Beach County Commission Chairwoman Shelley Vana told The Palm Beach Post that local governments should be able to enact gun rules without the worry of being fined or ejected from office.

No, I don’t agree. There’s a constitutional right at stake here, and I believe its within the state’s power to enforce that right. If Chairwoman Vana were talking about keeping blacks away from lunch counters, I think most everyone would agree that the state was absolutely within its power. Equal treatment for constitutional rights is our demand.

The Palm Beach county lawsuit, which was filed last week in West Palm Beach Circuit Court, said the new law was flawed on several grounds, including its withdrawal of the long-established immunity of local officials from being sued as individuals for the legislative act of passing an ordinance. The suit also notes that, contrary to the new law, the state constitution only allows the governor to temporarily suspend elected local officials for wrongdoing. Removal can only be done by a vote of the state Senate.

They might be on decent ground with the removal provision, but only the state enjoys sovereign immunity. Counties, towns, and cities have never been considered in our legal system to be sovereigns. Unless that immunity is part of the Florida Constitution, I don’t understand legally why the state couldn’t waive that immunity legislatively.

The Ledger accuses us of attempting to intimidate and bully legislators into not “going into the area of firearm regulation.” That is exactly correct. But this was necessary because these local worms have been doing that to Floridians and their constitutional rights for years. The shoe is now on the other foot and they don’t like it. I will proudly wear the badge of bully when it comes to standing up to foul busybodies who don’t know how to mind their own business. I’ll gladly intimidate legislators who want to erase parts of the Constitution, or pretend they are not bound by law. To me, that is civic duty.

8 thoughts on “Lawsuit over Florida Preemption”

  1. No reproductions?

    Florida has outlawed the photocopier?

    When copiers are outlawed, only outlaws will do office work.

  2. Every law designed to place restraints on government power should have at its center a provision for punishment. Otherwise, there is no actual restraint.

  3. Mobo is right! These government workers and politicians should be held to HIGHER standards than the citizens they pass laws on or write the corresponding regulations for.

    Their insulation from consequences of passing bad laws is a big part of the problem. Term limits, some sort of limits on service for bureaucrats, easy recall procedures, and preemption laws with teeth seem like a great start. Accountability is a grand idea…

  4. so let me get this right, the commission thinks that they should be able to pass an ordinance that directly contradicts state law and then leave it up to individuals to sue to have the conflicting ordinance overturned? Really? Sorta like if the commission decided they didn’t like interracial marriages and if people want to marry others not like them, then they should sue for the basic freedom of association right set forth in the constitution? Really?

Comments are closed.