By Matthew Holloway |
Pima County Superior Court Judge Greg Sakall issued a ruling earlier this week striking down Pima County Ordinance 2024-2. The ordinance was passed by the County Board of Supervisors in March 2024 and levied a fine of $1,000 against legal gun owners who failed to report a lost or stolen firearm within two days. According to the Goldwater Institute, which led the legal fight, the board appeared to be fully aware of the ordinance’s illegality “when it brazenly passed the ordinance.”
Goldwater took up the case of Air Force veteran Chris King and the Pima County-based Arizona Citizens Defense League. The group argued before the court that unless authorized by the Arizona legislature, no county or municipality in the state is legally permitted to enact any rule or ordinance that is firearms-related and exceeds any regulations already passed by the state.
In his ruling, Judge Sakall agreed that the county board’s actions violated multiple provisions of state law, writing that there is “no genuine issue of material fact,” and that the ordinance was pre-emptively rendered illegal by A.R.S. § 13- 3108(B) and (D) which state:
B. “A political subdivision of this state shall not require the licensing or registration of firearms or ammunition or any firearm or ammunition components or related accessories or prohibit the ownership, purchase, sale or transfer of firearms or ammunition or any firearm or ammunition components, or related accessories.”
D. “A political subdivision of this state shall not enact any rule or ordinance that relates to firearms and is more prohibitive than or that has a penalty that is greater than any state law penalty. A political subdivision’s rule or ordinance that relates to firearms and that is inconsistent with or more restrictive than state law, whether enacted before or after July 29, 2010, is null and void.”
As noted by Goldwater when it issued a letter to the board on behalf of the Arizona Citizens Defense League, the ordinance was passed even after “a majority of the board made comments prior to passage of the ordinance recognizing that firearms regulations belong at the state level.”
The majority Democrat board also ignored the objections of the sole dissenting Supervisor, Republican Steve Christy, who warned during the board’s March 2024 meeting: “Are we opening up Pima County to numerous lawsuits with various entities including issues with the state legislature as this definitely has conflicts with it?”
Christy suggested that the move by the board’s Democrat majority was intended as a “a typical diversion and detraction,” from the county’s more pressing issues such as illegal immigration.
Democrat Supervisor Dr. Matt Heinz even implicitly observed that such lawmaking is the purview of the state government when he said what he referred to as “impactful meaningful reform that affects gun safety” would only happen “if there is a Democrat Governor, Senate, and House in the state of Arizona.”
King, an NRA-certified firearms instructor who had a firearm stolen when his home was burglarized while he was deployed on active-duty outside the state, praised the ruling saying, “I’m grateful the court recognized that Pima County officials are not above the law. Firearm owners like me shouldn’t have to pay exorbitant fines as punishment for being robbed.”
Goldwater Staff Attorney Parker Jackson added in a statement, “Today’s ruling is a significant victory for the rule of law, for gun owners statewide, and for the state’s ability to prevent rogue cities and counties from creating a confusing patchwork of local firearm restrictions.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
