Ohio Supreme Court effectively nullifies ORC 9.68

[BB62]

Article title: Columbus Magazine Ban Lives On as Ohio High Court Allows Appeal of Injunction

"The battle to defend the Second Amendment in Ohio took an unwelcome turn with a recent state Supreme Court ruling that gives anti-gun municipalities new tools to fight injunctions blocking their unconstitutional ordinances.

Ohio is a preemption state. Local governments lack the authority to enact gun control measures beyond what state law explicitly permits. But Columbus decided to test those limits anyway. In December 2022, the city council approved two ordinances targeting gun owners. The first banned “large capacity magazines” capable of holding more than 30 rounds. The second created a new offense for “negligent storage of a firearm.” (article continues)

Columbus Magazine Ban Lives On as Ohio High Court Allows Appeal of Injunction

Ohio Supreme Court allows Columbus to appeal injunction blocking magazine ban, raising concerns for Second Amendment advocates in Ohio.

www.ammoland.com

This is disgusting - and as the article notes, it allows anti-gunners to do what they do so well: to put constitutional and statutory rights on hold while they endlessly litigate matters associated with the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Brian D.]

I don't know where all you've been posting this, but sadly here and the OFCC forums aren't going to get many readers. Obviously you know that already.

 

[color of law]

This article is a waist of ink. It is basically an interlocutory appeal dealing with a technical procedural issue. It does not effect the actual issue before the court. It is as the dissent says, it’s court-made legislation from the bench.

Now we wait for the appeals court to deal with the actual issue.

 

[BB62]

This article is a waist of ink. It is basically an interlocutory appeal dealing with a technical procedural issue. It does not effect the actual issue before the court. It is as the dissent says, it’s court-made legislation from the bench.

Now we wait for the appeals court to deal with the actual issue.

It's 'just' dealing with a technical procedural issue. Riiiight. The case was brought **3 years ago**!

NO, it's the OSC giving/validating yet another tool for the anti-gunners and like-minded courts to screw with gun owners. "Home rule" is apparently all-powerful.

How many years ago did the OSC uphold preemption? 10? 15? I can't recall. Regardless, the case at hand essentially puts the matter into play again. Ridiculous and disgusting.

To repeat: doing so allows anti-gunners to do what they do so well: to put constitutional and statutory rights on hold while they endlessly litigate matters associated with the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[color of law]

Columbus will loose this case in the end. The Delaware County Court of Common Pleas made a very solid decision.

https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/library/docLib/2023-04-25-Court-Order-Granting-The-Buckeye-Institute-s-Request-for-Preliminary-Injunction-in-Doe-v-Columbus.pdf

Columbus cannot overcome Heller and Bruen.

 

[DoubleTap]

Nice to read some legitimate posts for a change. Thank you!

 

[BB62]

Columbus will loose this case in the end. The Delaware County Court of Common Pleas made a very solid decision.

https://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/library/docLib/2023-04-25-Court-Order-Granting-The-Buckeye-Institute-s-Request-for-Preliminary-Injunction-in-Doe-v-Columbus.pdf

Columbus cannot overcome Heller and Bruen.

Yeah, anybody with any experience with the law already knows that.

However, it doesn't change the accuracy of my assertion nor of the last paragraph of the article - despite your unwillingness to acknowledge those facts.