Firearm Owners Against Crime v. City of Harrisburg Mayor Papenfuse

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the Commonwealth Court correctly held that Appellees had individual and associational standing to challenge four of the City of Harrisburg’s ordinances regulating firearms. Appellees filed a complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against the City, seeking to have ordinances declared unconstitutional and statutorily preempted. Appellees asserted the City’s ordinances impaired their constitutional rights to possess and use firearms and their statutory rights to be free from municipal firearms regulations. The trial court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, ruling that Appellees lacked standing. The Commonwealth Court reversed, and the Supreme Court affirmed. The Court applied “the traditional substantial-direct-immediate test for standing” and determined that Appellees were the proper plaintiffs in this declaratory judgment action. They had a substantial, direct, and immediate interest in the constitutionality and preemption of the challenged ordinances.

Search entire site by keyword...

Search for Summaries by Hashtag...

Past Opinion Summaries