UPDATE

Two More Washington Counties Join Anti-1639 Insurrection

Dave Workman of Liberty Park Press : Washington AG Threatens Gun Dealers With Legal Jeopardy Video

Two more county commissions in Washington State have taken stands against the enforcement of a controversial gun control initiative passed by voters last fall, while members of the state’s largest gun show operation, the Washington Arms Collectors WAC, have reached in their wallets to support the federal lawsuit now being waged against the measure.

Commissioners in Grays Harbor and Benton counties passed resolutions this week against enforcement of the initiative, which raised the minimum age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle to age 21 and classified all semi-auto rifles as so-called “assault weapons.” The measure also requires “safe storage” of guns, mandates training in order to legally purchase such a firearm, establishes a 10-day waiting period, and adds a fee for paperwork to purchase a self-loading rifle.

Opponents have called it an “extremist” piece of legislation that was financed by Seattle-based billionaires and may be unconstitutional considering a ruling by a federal judge in California that struck down that state’s ban on large capacity magazines.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, in his 86-page ruling that declared the magazine ban unconstitutional, wrote, “People may cede liberty to their government in exchange for the promise of safety. Or government may gain compliance from its people by forcibly disarming all. In the United States, the Second Amendment takes the legislative experiment off the table. Regardless of current popularity, neither a legislature nor voters may trench on constitutional rights. An unconstitutional statute adopted by a dozen jurisdictions is no less unconstitutional by virtue of its popularity.”

I-1639 passed in a dozen Washington counties but failed in the rest.

Several weeks ago, Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich told Liberty Park Press that he had received hundreds of phone calls, including many from people who voted for the initiative, expressing alarm and surprise at what the measure actually required. At the time, he said many people felt they had been misled into believing the initiative was about school safety, but it is really a gun control measure.

Some 20 county sheriffs, including Knezovich, have announced they won’t enforce provisions of the initiative.

The Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association are partnered in a federal lawsuit against the measure,

And over the past two months, WAC members have donated more than $13,000 to help pay the legal expenses to fight the initiative.

Gov. Jay Inslee—who is currently running last in a race for the Democratic nomination for president—and Attorney General Bob Ferguson have warned sheriffs about possible liability for not enforcing the initiative’s requirements. Both men supported the initiative and the current insurrection by sheriffs and county governments amounts to an embarrassing political slap in the face.

 

Below are Warnings from the attorney general today,  last month and last week.

Attorney General Bob Ferguson and Governor Jay Inslee sent a letter to 262 firearms dealers in counties where sheriffs have indicated they will not enforce I-1639, warning that, regardless of local officials’ opposition to Initiative 1639, firearms dealers are still required to follow state law.

As a condition of their federal licenses, firearms dealers are required to comply with state and federal law. Unless a court rules otherwise, laws and initiatives are presumed to be constitutional. No court has struck down any provision of I-1639.

“Local officials’ personal opposition to I-1639 may have created confusion regarding firearms dealers’ legal responsibilities,” Ferguson said. “We wrote this letter to ensure these dealers have accurate information about the initiative to avoid legal jeopardy because of statements made by local elected officials.”

“Despite what some of these sheriffs would have people believe, no one has the ability to pick and choose which laws to follow,” Inslee said. “It’s very simple: Our state’s voters overwhelmingly approved stronger background checks and gun safety measures, and dealers will be required to comply with those laws.”

The letter informs dealers about their license requirements, and the possibility of license revocation or state or federal criminal charges if they break the law.

One provision of I-1639 impacting firearms dealers is already in effect: The prohibition on selling semiautomatic assault rifles to those under age 21.

The remaining provisions go into effect July 1. Most notably for firearms dealers, this includes enhanced background checks on all sales of semiautomatic assault rifles. These checks are the same as those that have been performed on pistol sales for many years. The law has a variety of implications for firearms dealers, including mandatory waiting periods on all semiautomatic assault rifles, safety notices and offering to sell or give trigger locks or similar devices on all firearm purchases.

Earlier this week, AG Ferguson released a “Frequently Asked Questions” document with further clarification on the initiative’s requirements. That FAQ is available here.

AG FERGUSON I

Open letter to Washington’s sheriffs and police chiefs refusing to enforce Initiative 1639:

In November 2018, Washingtonians overwhelmingly adopted Initiative 1639.

Numerous sheriffs and police chiefs have stated that they will not implement or enforce the initiative. I want to share my thoughts on this important issue, which affects both the safety of our communities and respect for the rule of law.

Like all laws passed by the people of Washington and their representatives, Initiative 1639 is presumed constitutional. No court has ruled that this initiative is unconstitutional.

I will defend Initiative 1639 against any legal challenge. My office defeated the legal challenge to the previous gun safety initiative passed by the people, and I am confident we will defeat any constitutional challenge to Initiative 1639 as well. Local law enforcement officials are entitled to their opinions about the constitutionality of any law, but those personal views do not absolve us of our duty to enforce Washington laws and protect the public.

I would like to focus on one component of Initiative 1639 in which you play a vital role, and have a legal obligation. Effective July 1, Initiative 1639 requires enhanced background checks for the purchase of semiautomatic assault rifles, which are identical to the enhanced background checks currently required for all handgun purchases in Washington state. Just like handgun purchases, local law enforcement officials are required to perform these background checks.

Local law enforcement has been performing these enhanced background checks for all handgun purchases in Washington state for many years. These enhanced background checks keep guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals who lawfully cannot own firearms because of a mental illness or criminal record. As far as I know, no Washington sheriff or police chief has refused to perform these enhanced background checks for handguns. Why refuse to perform them for semiautomatic assault rifles?

I am deeply concerned that the failure of local law enforcement to perform Initiative 1639’s background check requirement will jeopardize public safety in our state by allowing the sale of semiautomatic assault rifles to dangerous individuals not lawfully allowed to own a gun.

State law provides immunity to local law enforcement officers who run these checks “in good faith.” However, in the event a police chief or sheriff refuses to perform the background check required by Initiative 1639, they could be held liable if there is a sale or transfer of a firearm to a dangerous individual prohibited from possessing a firearm and that individual uses that firearm to do harm. In short, the taxpayers of your city or county assume the financial risk of your decision to impose your personal views over the law.

Outside your legal obligation to perform the background checks, you have discretion, of course, to prioritize your resources. This is a trust placed on you by the Washingtonians you serve. Enforcement discretion, however, cannot subvert the rule of law. All Washingtonians, including those of us in government, are equally subject to the law.

Analogies to marijuana and immigration law enforcement are misplaced. This is not a situation where the federal government is trying to force the state to enforce federal laws. Rather, Initiative 1639 was submitted to the people of Washington and was adopted as state law by nearly 60% of the people. No action by a city council or county commission can change this state law or the responsibilities and duties that the law vests in Washington’s law enforcement agencies.

I am personally deeply opposed to the death penalty, and have maintained reservations about its constitutionality for many years – but my personal feelings about the death penalty did not impact my duties as Attorney General. Last October, our State Supreme Court unanimously ruled in State v. Gregory that Washington’s death penalty was applied in an arbitrary and racially biased manner. Until the Gregory decision, however, my office continued to defend the death sentence in federal courts when death row inmates filed appeals, even after the Governor announced his moratorium. I did this out of respect for the rule of law. At the same time, I proposed legislation to the State Legislature to abolish the death penalty. If you personally disagree with Initiative 1639, seek to change it. Or file a lawsuit challenging it. But do not substitute your personal views over that of the people.

Under Article 1, Section 1 of the Washington State Constitution, “All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.” As public officers, our duty is to abide by the will of the people we serve, and implement and enforce the laws they adopt. I encourage you to do so.

Sincerely,

BOB FERGUSON
Attorney General