Given Pennsylvania’s size and political diversity, it is no surprise that residents from different parts of the state have contrasting views on gun laws. In some municipalities where there is substantial support for firearms restrictions, ordinances have been passed imposing stronger regulations than those that exist on the state or federal level. In response, the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed a law preempting cities and towns from passing tough gun laws. Now, the state’s Supreme Court has weighed in regarding the legality of those ordinances. 

The case, Crawford v. Commonwealth, was initiated by the City of Philadelphia, CeaseFirePA Education Fund and individuals affected by gun violence, who argued that the state's preemption statutes infringed upon their constitutional rights and hindered local safety efforts. However, the justices disagreed and upheld the section of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act that prevents municipalities from enacting their own gun regulations.

Though Pennsylvania’s Constitution provides for “home rule,” the justices said that the preemption law does not violate the rights of cities such as Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Lancaster and Harrisburg that chose to challenge the ban. Some of the specific ordinances aimed at reducing gun violence included the following:

• Permit-to-purchase — Some cities attempted to require proof of a valid firearms permit in order to buy a gun.

• Monthly waiting periods — One way municipalities tried to reduce the flow of guns was to limit individuals to one firearm purchase per month. 

• Extreme Risk Protective Orders — Gun safety advocates support the establishment of Extreme Risk Protective Orders, which give judges the power to prohibit someone from possessing a firearm. 

This ruling reaffirms the state's exclusive authority over firearm regulation, emphasizing that municipalities cannot implement ordinances that conflict with state law. While the court acknowledged the severity of gun violence and its impact on communities, it emphasized that any changes to firearm regulations must occur at the state legislative level.  

Even though cities and towns cannot implement their own gun regulation rules, the court pointed out there are still numerous state and federal criminal statutes addressing the use, possession, purchase and sale of firearms. Should you face a weapons-related charge, it is critical to speak with a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney who can advise you regarding the relevant law, explain how your Second Amendment rights might apply and develop a sound strategy to challenge the prosecution’s case against you. 

Matthew R. Zatko, Attorney at Law in Somerset advocates on behalf of Pennsylvanians accused of gun crimes and other types of criminal offenses. My firm serves Indiana, Bedford, Cambria and Somerset counties. You can set up a consultation by calling 814-443-1631 or contacting me online.