Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Liability Firearms Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee rejects bill creating civil cause of action for alleged infringements of gun rights
Summary
House Bill 554, the Firearms Freedom Protection Act, which would create a civil cause of action against government entities or officials who infringe on gun rights, failed in the Veil Justice Subcommittee after law-enforcement groups warned of broad exposure and potential unintended consequences for officers executing warrants.
Representative Capley presented House Bill 554, described as the Firearms Freedom Protection Act. The bill would create a civil action against governmental entities, officials, employees or agents that infringe on a person’s right to bear arms under the Tennessee or U.S. Constitutions; the sponsor said the measure would provide a remedy when rights are violated.
Law-enforcement organizations—including Jimmy Musick, representing the Tennessee Sheriffs’ Association and the Tennessee Association of Chiefs of Police, and Patrick Powell, policy director at the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation—testified in opposition. Musick warned that the bill was drafted too broadly and could expose officers acting in good faith—such as those executing search warrants later suppressed—to individual liability and punitive damages. “Our problem comes into, when you're looking in here about something like a search warrant ... It is later suppressed ... that is not a law or regulation that a court has struck down,” Musick said, adding concerns that the bill’s damages provisions could impose large liabilities on officers.
Powell described the draft as “overly broad” and flagged the absence of a clear statute of limitations in the text, which he said could allow lawsuits many years later. Both witnesses urged the committee to oppose the bill to avoid chilling law-enforcement operations.
Supporters, including Representative Todd, who called the bill a needed remedy for constitutional violations and emphasized citizens’ ability to hold government accountable, pushed back and said the bill was intended only to allow recourse when rights are infringed.
The subcommittee voted on House Bill 554 and the clerk recorded 3 ayes and 4 noes, resulting in the bill failing to advance. Members discussed possible amendments to clarify intent and protect officers acting within their lawful authority but no amendment passed that day.
