Does State Law Invalidating Local Gun Regulations Violate Citys Constitutional Home Rule Powers?
City of Cleveland v. State of Ohio, Case no. 2009-2280 8th District Court of Appeals (Cuyahoga County) ISSUES: • Does R.C. 9.68 violate the City of Cleveland’s “home rule” powers under the Ohio Constitution by prohibiting the city from enforcing local ordinances that regulate the sale, possession, ownership and discharge of firearms within the city limits? • Does R.C. 9.68 violate the separation of powers doctrine of the Ohio Constitution by legislatively mandating that, in cases where municipalities are sued for continuing to enforce local gun ordinances, state courts must order the city to pay the court costs and attorney fees of any litigant who successfully challenges the constitutionality of that ordinance? BACKGROUND: In December 2006, the General Assembly enacted Sub. House Bill 347. The bill contained specific amendments to the state’s previous statutory scheme regulating the concealed carry of firearms and established new statewide administrative procedures for the issuance of
Related Questions
- If a teacher endangers a student, or otherwise breaks a local, state, or federal law, how will the interpreter handle that?
- Did the police violate any constitutional provisions, state regulations, statutes, or other legal authority?
- Does State Law Banning City Employee Residency Requirement Violate Cities’ ‘Home Rule’ Powers?
