The Second Amendment Sanctuary City resolution proposed by Paul Rogers begs the question of whether the assembly is elected to adopt rules and policies on anything it deems fit once elected, or whether and when it has the responsibility of consulting the public for specific direction.
Aside from whether this resolution might encourage someone to violate federal law because they mistakenly believe they will be excused because we passed a local resolution, or whether we should adopt a position that advocates potentially violating the US Constitution or a federal law, the resolution completely sidesteps the issue of how we would ever determine which federal laws we believe are unconstitutional. The assembly is not a court, its members are not judges or legal scholars, and even if they were, the assembly does not have the power to supersede the authority of higher administrative offices or courts.
Aside from the obvious legal pitfalls, no assembly member knows how the majority of the community feels on this far-reaching and divisive issue because we’ve never been asked. They should not presume to know because someone called on the phone or most of their personal friends hold a certain view. If our assembly members are honest about the limitations of their own experience they will acknowledge a question of this nature should be put to a vote of the people. To not do so demonstrates a serious lack of respect for the whole community, and for the processes and procedures by which we govern ourselves.
Gershon Cohen