The proposal, which would expand the rights of the NRA and other interest groups to sue municipalities, easily passed the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee last week within days of its introduction and without hearings. It could go to a full House vote as soon as March; its fate in the Senate is unclear.
Under the bill, plaintiffs who challenge local gun-control ordinances could seek reimbursement for double their actual damages, attorney fees and costs, even if the municipality repealed the ordinance before a ruling is made in the case.
A court also might impose a $5,000 penalty and the plaintiff could seek triple damages, in addition to costs and attorney fees, if a judge found the municipality violated the state preemption law.
Boroughs, townships, and cities across the state, including at least nine in Southeastern Pennsylvania, began enacting local ordinances aimed at cracking down on illegal gun trafficking in 2008 after the General Assembly did not act on a statewide measure to crack down on so-called straw purchases of guns.
The ordinances in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia have stood up to legal challenge. Six cases heard by state courts, including one that went to the state Supreme Court, found that plaintiffs - including individuals and the NRA - did not have standing to sue.
The bill addresses that issue by granting such standing to any "aggrieved party" belonging to a gun rights group - or as the bill puts it, to any "membership organization . . . that is dedicated in whole or in part to protecting the legal, civil, or constitutional rights of its membership."
Supporters of the measure say the local ordinances violate existing state preemption law, which bars localities from enacting their own firearms laws.
