HB2269 Related to Unlawful Firearm Seizure by Feds

[ScooterSissy]

I think it's more geared toward keeping state level officers from enforcing federal gun laws. While the law cannot usurp federal law, the state can control its own resources. Suppose Washington passes a complete gun ban, this would make it such that Texas officers cannot confiscate weapons, only federal officers. This would greatly hinder the process.

I thought Eric Holder (under President Obama's reign) established that local authorities are not permitted to enforce federal law anyway? Or did that only apply to immigration?

[CJD]

I think it's more geared toward keeping state level officers from enforcing federal gun laws. While the law cannot usurp federal law, the state can control its own resources. Suppose Washington passes a complete gun ban, this would make it such that Texas officers cannot confiscate weapons, only federal officers. This would greatly hinder the process.

I thought Eric Holder (under President Obama's reign) established that local authorities are not permitted to enforce federal law anyway? Or did that only apply to immigration?

I'm not aware of that incident.

[ScooterSissy]

I think it's more geared toward keeping state level officers from enforcing federal gun laws. While the law cannot usurp federal law, the state can control its own resources. Suppose Washington passes a complete gun ban, this would make it such that Texas officers cannot confiscate weapons, only federal officers. This would greatly hinder the process.

I thought Eric Holder (under President Obama's reign) established that local authorities are not permitted to enforce federal law anyway? Or did that only apply to immigration?

I'm not aware of that incident.

Arizona SB1070 passed in 2010. The US Justice Department filed suit. The US Supreme Court struck down portions of the law, basically not allowing the state to hold prisoners for immigration violations based on federal preemption.

But my comment was largely tongue in cheek.