ILA | Legal Reckoning for Jackson, MS Mayor’s Foolish Carry Ban

Gun News

As we reported earlier, Chokwe Lumumba, the mayor of Jackson, Mississippi, announced an executive order on April 24 as part of his response to the COVID-19 civil emergency. The order prohibited the carrying of an unconcealed loaded or unloaded pistol or revolver or any other firearm, carried upon the person or in a sheath, belt holster or shoulder holster or in a purse, handbag, satchel, other similar bag or briefcase or fully enclosed case, with such pistol, revolver, or firearm being wholly or partially visible.

Almost immediately, the Mississippi Justice Institute filed a federal lawsuit against the mayor and the city on behalf of State Rep. Dana Criswell, alleging that the mayors open carry ban was an illegal and unconstitutional attack on firearm rights.

Lynn Fitch, Mississippis Attorney General and the chief legal officer for the state, filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff. The brief notes that not only did Mayor Lumumba attempt to override state and federal laws, he failed to connect the need for the order to the COVID-19 pandemic, the reason for enacting the civil emergency in the first place.” “Given the Mayors long-standing and well-documented opposition to Mississippiansright to open carry, it is abundantly clear that the Order serves as pretext to achieve a goal he has sought for years, to extinguish the constitutional right to open carry.

The litigation came to an exceptionally speedy halt on June 12, with the entry of an order and consent decree by Chief U.S. District Judge Daniel P. Jordan, III that spelled out the terms of the settlement between the parties. Although the order means the underlying action is dismissed, the court retains the authority to enforce the order in perpetuity.” 

The consent decree includes the partiesexpress recognition of the importance of the rightsprotected by the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear armsprovision of the Mississippi Constitution. The City of Jackson, the mayor and city council, and all other city agents or employees, are prohibited from adopting:

any orders, resolutions, ordinances, policies, or practices which have the purpose or effect of directly or indirectly prohibiting, restricting, or inhibiting the open carry of firearms, unless a statute or law of the State of Mississippi is adopted or amended to specifically prohibit, restrict, or inhibit the open carry of firearms in Mississippi, or to specifically authorize municipalities to do so, and such statute or law is not held violative of the United States Constitution or the Mississippi Constitution by a court of competent jurisdiction.

The mayors colleagues on the Jackson City Council had already made it clear they did not support the mayors actions, going so far as to pass a unanimous resolution on April 28 condemning his executive order. (Mayor Lumumba later dismissively referred to opponents of his order as outside agitators,which apparently included these local councillors.) Unsurprisingly, the consent decree contains a specific reference stressing that the City Council disapproves of Mayor Lumumbas executive order.” 

That sentiment isnt restricted to the city council. An online petition launched by Mayor Lumumba in April refers to his executive order and seeks to repeal open carry in Mississippi. As of mid-June, not only had the petition failed to reach the very modest target of 200 signatures, it was actually being used by many to express their support for open carry and their constitutional rights.

It is unclear what the mayor thinks of this court-ordered rebuke but it seems hes practicing a bit of social distancing from the whole sorry affair. Although the City admitted the truth of the allegations made in the lawsuit as part of the consent decree that the executive order violated the plaintiffs rights under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 3, Section 12 of the Mississippi Constitution, and Mississippi statutory law the decree adds that Mayor Lumumba himself had not filed responsive pleadingsin the litigation but nonetheless denies Plaintiffs allegations.

Source link


  1. 328510 167670This sort of wanting to come to a difference in her or his lifestyle, initial generally Los angeles Excess weight weightloss scheme can be a large running in as it reached that strive. weight loss 2397

  2. 689412 651056Of course like your website but you require to check the spelling on several of your posts. Several of them are rife with spelling difficulties and I discover it quite bothersome to tell the truth nevertheless Ill undoubtedly come back once again. 211775

  3. 401530 687622Wow, amazing weblog layout! How lengthy have you ever been running a blog for? you make running a weblog glance straightforward. The total look of your internet site is magnificent, properly the content material material! 958038

  4. 133543 15844Normally I do not learn post on blogs, nonetheless I would like to say that this write-up quite pressured me to look at and do so! Your writing style has been surprised me. Thank you, quite fantastic post. 664942

  5. 331217 278741Hello Guru, what entice you to post an article. This post was really intriguing, particularly since I was searching for thoughts on this topic last Thursday. 271398

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *