A court loss isn’t the end of the fight for stricter gun laws in Pa., advocates say

Spotlight PA is an independent, nonpartisan, and nonprofit newsroom producing investigative and public-service journalism that holds power to account and drives positive change in Pennsylvania. Sign up for our free newsletters.

HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has dealt a blow to Philadelphia and other municipalities’ efforts to pass stricter gun laws, but advocates say their fight isn’t over.

They’re preparing to continue pushing for greater gun control on two fronts: the courts and divided state legislature.

Pennsylvania is one of 42 states with a law that preempts local governments from passing or enforcing gun statutes stricter than those allowed by the legislature. This has long rankled leaders in big cities, who argue their jurisdictions have unique public safety needs that require their own laws.

In 2021, the city of Philadelphia, anti-violence group CeaseFirePA, and others sued the commonwealth, arguing the state preemption law denies Pennsylvanians their constitutional rights to life and liberty. The state Supreme Court rejected the argument in a unanimous decision.

Pittsburgh also appealed a preemption case to the high court, asking the justices to rule on several stalled local gun laws, including an assault rifle ban. City officials have said that litigation is likely over.

Despite the ruling, Adam Garber, executive director of CeaseFirePA, says he still sees legal avenues to challenge the preemption law more directly.

Other pending lawsuits specifically challenge whether the preemption law applies to municipalities regulating the sale of “ghost gun” parts — kits to build untraceable firearms at home — or the reporting of lost or stolen guns. The high court delayed them while it considered Crawford v. Commonwealth.

“In each of those cases, we are saying simply, this isn’t about firearms,” Garber said. “This is about parts that aren’t preempted, or this is about people who aren’t the possessor legally of the firearm, and that those statutes should be allowed to go ahead.”

He added that in Crawford, the state Supreme Court “did not in any way say … that every law was preempted. And so we really urge them to … consider that there are policies that are not preempted by state statute that they should allow for.”

Even though legal avenues might not be exhausted, state lawmakers who support tougher gun laws are feeling additional pressure to use the legislative process now that the state Supreme Court has ruled that the preemption stands.

“It’s troubling the court came out against communities making their own decisions about public safety, but the ruling is the ruling,” said state Rep. Tim Briggs (D., Montgomery), who chairs the committee through which most gun legislation passes in the state House.

“Now it’s up to the legislature to keep up the fight and once again advance real gun violence prevention measures supported by a vast majority of Pennsylvanians and deliver results meeting constitutional muster,” he told Spotlight PA.

The state House, controlled narrowly by Democrats, passed three notable gun-related bills during the last two-year legislative session.

One is known as a “red flag” law, which would allow courts to issue extreme risk protection orders seizing guns from people deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. Another would require background checks for all gun purchases, ending a longtime exception for private sales of long guns. The third would ban ghost gun kits.

The Republican-controlled state Senate did not consider the bills.

State Sen. Lisa Baker (R., Luzerne) chairs the upper chamber’s Judiciary Committee and has said she is open to certain gun-related bills. In 2019, her committee held a series of hearings on guns and mental health, after which she said she called for “constitutional, enforceable, and practical” legislative proposals.

Last year, after Democrats advanced bills to expand background checks and allow for the temporary seizure of guns, Baker said in a statement that they did not meet her standard.

“I believe the issue of helping individuals in crisis would be more appropriately addressed through a modernization of the mental health procedures law as it relates to gun rights to ensure those in need of treatment receive it and that due process is maintained,” Baker said at the time.

A spokesperson for Baker did not respond to a request for comment on other bills she might support in the session that begins in 2025.

While the lower chamber is more amenable to gun restrictions, passage of these bills isn’t guaranteed.

A number of initiatives faltered during the last session, including bills requiring secure gun storage in homes with children; creating penalties for parents who let a minor possess a gun; banning sales of assault-style weapons; regulating 3D-printed firearms the same as regular guns; and shortening the deadline for judges to notify State Police of mental health conditions that should preclude someone from owning a gun.

Some failed by a single vote, including a bill to require gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms to police more quickly.

Others succeeded by similarly narrow margins. The bill to ban ghost guns passed the chamber with the support of three suburban Republicans; the red flag bill got support from just two GOP members.

The universal background check got slightly stronger support, with nine Republican votes in favor. (The chamber’s most conservative Democrat voted against all three.)

Garber, of CeaseFirePA, said he thinks lawmakers should learn from the successful state House bills. In particular, he thinks there is room for compromise on measures specifically targeted at stopping violent crime or cutting down on gun trafficking.

“I think when we talk about policies that address gun trafficking and guns used in violent crime, like ghost guns, there’s real hope [that] Republicans, who are often saying they want to back the blue and back law enforcement, will step up,” Garber said.

The trick, as he sees it, will be marrying the things that both parties care about.

“I think there’s a lot of places where there are policies that have strong bipartisan support, strong support from the law enforcement community, and where the Republicans can … say, ‘Look, we have to deal with this particular aspect of the crisis. It has nothing to do with your ability to have a gun for hunting or for personal protection.’”

Spotlight PA’s Stephen Caruso contributed reporting.

BEFORE YOU GO… If you learned something from this article, pay it forward and contribute to Spotlight PA at spotlightpa.org/donate. Spotlight PA is funded by foundations and readers like you who are committed to accountability journalism that gets results.