In a significant legal ruling, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a Missouri law on Monday that had barred state and local police from enforcing certain federal gun laws. The court’s decision found that the Missouri law violated the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, which establishes that federal law takes precedence over state laws when the two are in conflict.
The ruling is a notable affirmation of federal authority over states in matters where federal laws have been enacted, particularly in the highly contentious area of gun regulation. “A State cannot invalidate federal law to itself,” Chief Judge Steven Colloton wrote in the court’s opinion, making clear that Missouri’s attempt to circumvent federal gun laws could not stand under constitutional scrutiny.
The Missouri law, known as the Second Amendment Preservation Act, was passed by the state’s Republican-controlled legislature and signed into law in 2021. It prohibited state and local law enforcement officers from enforcing federal gun laws that did not have an equivalent statute in Missouri law. Law enforcement agencies that violated the law could face a fine of $50,000 for each officer found to be enforcing the federal statutes without a corresponding state law.
The law targeted several key areas of federal firearms regulation, including weapons registration, tracking, and restrictions on firearm possession by certain individuals, such as those convicted of domestic violence offenses. Missouri lawmakers who supported the bill argued that it was necessary to protect the Second Amendment rights of the state’s residents, particularly in the face of what they perceived as potential overreach by the federal government under President Joe Biden’s administration.
However, the law quickly drew legal challenges. The U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Missouri, arguing that the state’s law was unconstitutional because it directly conflicted with federal law. The department contended that the law impeded the ability of federal authorities to enforce gun laws and disrupted cooperative efforts between federal and state law enforcement agencies.
The Missouri law’s impact was felt almost immediately, leading to the breakdown of a key crime-fighting partnership between the state’s attorney general’s office and federal prosecutors. Under the Safer Streets Initiative, launched by former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, attorneys from the state were deputized as assistant U.S. attorneys to help prosecute violent crimes in collaboration with federal prosecutors. The initiative was heralded as a successful collaboration aimed at reducing violent crime in Missouri’s urban areas.
More Read
However, the enactment of the Second Amendment Preservation Act put a strain on these efforts. The Justice Department reported that Missouri’s state crime lab, operated by the Highway Patrol, refused to process evidence that would support federal firearms prosecutions, citing the new state law. This refusal hindered federal efforts to prosecute gun-related crimes and underscored the practical difficulties of the law’s implementation.
Missouri’s Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey responded to the court’s ruling by stating that his office was reviewing the decision. “I will always fight for Missourians’ Second Amendment rights,” Bailey said, signaling that the state might consider further legal actions or legislative measures in response to the ruling.
The ruling from the 8th Circuit is part of a broader legal and political struggle over gun regulation in the United States, particularly in states with strong pro-gun constituencies. Missouri’s law was part of a wave of state-level efforts to push back against federal gun control measures, especially in the wake of new legislation signed by President Biden. The federal legislation, passed in 2022, included provisions to strengthen background checks for young gun buyers, prevent more domestic violence offenders from obtaining firearms, and encourage states to adopt “red flag” laws that allow authorities to temporarily confiscate firearms from individuals deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.
The 8th Circuit’s decision underscores the limitations of state power when it comes to overriding federal laws, especially in areas like gun regulation where federal and state policies often collide. As Missouri and other states continue to grapple with these legal boundaries, the ruling serves as a reminder of the enduring authority of the federal government in setting and enforcing nationwide standards.
