Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects floor amendment on public-accommodation language, approves firearm-law changes
Summary
A floor amendment to clarify private-property rights to restrict firearms and to exclude 'places of public accommodation' split the Senate 13–13 and failed; the bill itself passed later 20–6 and will be sent to the House.
Senate Bill 48, a set of uniform firearm-law provisions, generated a contested floor debate on whether private property owners who hold themselves out for business (so-called 'places of public accommodation') would retain the right to restrict firearms on their property.
Senator Waddupps offered a floor amendment intended to clarify that the statute does not prohibit a property owner from restricting firearms on private property that is not a place of public accommodation. Opponents worried the new language could be read to limit private-property rights or to inadvertently preempt owners’ ability to restrict weapons in private workplaces. Senator Thomas and others asked for intent language to avoid unintended consequences for large venues and private universities such as BYU and the Delta Center.
The floor amendment was voted on and tied 13–13 (with three senators absent), and the amendment therefore failed. The Senate later voted on the amended bill as presented and reported a final roll call of 20 ayes, 6 nays, and 3 absent; SB 48 passed and will be transmitted to the House.
What happens next: With the floor amendment defeated, the bill advances to the House under the language the Senate adopted; sponsors and critics alike signaled interest in further clarifying ‘‘public accommodation’’ in future legislation or explanatory intent language.
