General Bill by Rodrigues
Preemption of Firearms and Ammunition Regulation: Providing that written or unwritten policies are subject to provisions allowing for recovery of damages if such policies violate specified provisions; providing that a plaintiff challenging a local government regulation concerning firearms is considered a prevailing plaintiff for certain purposes in specified circumstances, etc.
Votes: Yeas 6 Nays 3.
And watching the proceedings, I know understand this part:
If after the filing of a complaint a defendant voluntarily changes the ordinance, regulation, measure, directive, rule, enactment, order, or policy, written or unwritten, promulgated or caused to be enforced in violation of this section, with or without court action, the plaintiff is considered a prevailing plaintiff for purposes of this section.
As explained, it means that once a lawsuit has been initiated, it does not matter that the local government or official changes it or nullifies the violation to state preemption, they still will have to pay for court costs and legal fees. The way I see it, that will stop the temptation of making an ordinance and then getting rid of it just to drain the bank account of the plaintiff.
Marion Hammer representing the NRA and Unified Sportsmen of Florida’s waived in support of the bill and representatives from Moms Demand and two other interest groups waived in opposition.
And I just got an email informing me the bill has been sent to the Senate’s Judiciary committee.
The House version is up for discussion tomorrow with the Civil Justice & Property Rights Subcommittee.
I’ll keep you posted.
Where is Florida Carry? Are they asleep, stupid, or apathetic?
If after the filing of a complaint a defendant voluntarily changes the ordinance, regulation, measure, directive, rule, enactment, order, or policy, written or unwritten, promulgated or caused to be enforced in violation of this section, with or without court action, the plaintiff is considered a prevailing plaintiff for purposes of this section.
This … is … brilliant.
Under the bill as a whole, if your rights get trampled, you have the right to sue. That’s fantastic.
But under this section, if they f@#k up and then try to change it to “fix” it, the change is an automatic admission that they f@#ked up … and you win by default. That’s even better!
I agree, this should prevent the hullabaloo that happened in NYC. It was prohibited to transport firearms outside the city. People went to jail over that ordinance. It was challenged and taken all the way up to SCOTUS, at which point the city quietly did away with the ordinance, thus mooting the case.
Under this law, any city that tries that crap will still be liable for having the ordinance in the first place. Getting rid of it doesn’t moot the lawsuit; rather, it admits defeat and accepts liability.
Love it!