State Sen. Terry Johnson, R-McDermott, during the Ohio State Senate session in the Senate Chamber at the Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio. (Photo by Graham Stokes for the Ohio Capital Journal. Only repost photo with original story.)
An Ohio lawmaker wants to punish cities for passing local gun ordinances by forcing them to pay monetary damages to any citizen who successfully challenges them.
State Sen. Terry Johnson, R-McDermott, has filed legislation to allow private citizens to sue cities for “punitive or exemplary damages.”
The change concerns Ohio’s preemption law, ensuring state control over the right to regulate firearms.
The law already allows people to sue for damages, but Johnson’s proposal includes a five-word amendment to expand what they can claim.
The bill does not explicitly define “punitive” or “exemplary” damages, but broadly speaking, they are monetary awards intended to punish the perpetrator and make him an example to others.
“The line must be drawn”
He introduced Johnson Ohio Senate Bill 278 last week, presenting it as a way to level the playing field between citizens and government.
“Our citizens should feel emboldened to repeal these unlawful regulations without having to bear the financial burden of doing the right thing,” Johnson said.
“Municipalities, cities and the like have deep pockets and plenty of lawyers, unlike the average citizen.”
The Ohio Constitution grants local governments broad powers over local affairs, and Johnson insists he believes strongly in this principle of self-government.
“However, everything that violates the Constitution should be demarcated,” he said.
The state law prohibiting local gun ordinances, which Johnson’s bill would amend, is a statute, not part of the Constitution.
By his own admission, Johnson’s bill is largely a response to local gun laws passed by the city of Columbus.
In 2022, the city approved ordinances banning large-capacity magazines and requiring protected home storage of guns.
A group of supporters, the Buckeye Firearms Association, challenged the regulations in court, and the case went to the state Supreme Court.
The Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case in March but has not yet issued a ruling.
The Ohio Supreme Court is hearing Columbus’ appeal over local gun laws
“I hope that we will impose potential financial consequences on these cities that so recklessly trample on the rights of their residents,” Johnson said.
He added that the prospect of monetary compensation would provide “vigilant defenders of freedom” with financial protection to challenge local laws.
Reactions
During his first committee hearing, Johnson’s proposal was warmly welcomed by fellow Republicans.
State Sen. Kyle Koehler of Springfield recalls being concerned about having to take a gun on a cross-country trip.
“My biggest fear was, what do I do driving through Illinois? Because it’s like, do I have to take apart this firearm?” Koehler said.
Koehler said he didn’t want to “suddenly break a law I didn’t know existed” by driving around Ohio, and asked whether Johnson’s proposal was intended to avoid that problem.
Truth be told, this is not the case. Johnson’s legislation only allows injured citizens to sue for greater damages. To the extent that Ohio’s gun laws are intended to bring uniformity, those laws are already in effect.
Across the aisle, state Sen. Kent Smith, D-Euclid, pressed Johnson on the scope of the problem he is trying to address. N
regarding the lawsuit, Columbus asked if Johnson had any other examples of local gun laws.
“We’ll be happy to search and take a look at it,” Johnson said, before confirming, “Since the preemption law passed, it’s been mostly Columbus.”
Continuing, Smith asked what has happened to Ohio’s gun-related death rate since the preemption law was passed 15 years ago.
“I believe that Covid cases (they) have increased, gun deaths overall, including gun homicides and gun suicides, and the numbers have been declining since 2021,” Johnson said.
But Smith brought him back to the original question.
“These numbers have increased by about 50% from 2006 to 2024,” he said. “So yes, they may have gone away as of 2021, but that’s why I’ve been asking in the last 15 years since this section was passed.”
Meanwhile, Columbus City Attorney Zach Klein, an official who has spent the past few years defending the ordinances Johnson wants to roll back, spoke much more directly about his opposition.
“SB 278 is bad for cities, bad for public safety, bad for the majority of Ohioans who want real action on gun safety, and it’s just bad policy,” he said.
“I oppose these efforts to make it more difficult for cities to take meaningful steps to protect the safety and well-being of residents from senseless gun violence, and we will be prepared to testify against this bill when it appears in committee.”
Follow Ohio Capital Journal reporter Nick Evans on X Or on Bluesky.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
