divegeek wrote:Even without the Utah GFSZA the U could use the same statutes they're trying to use to restrict open carry -- and concealed carry without a CFP would still be illegal on campus.
I think there's a fairly strong argument to be made that the U shouldn't even be using these statutes to ban open carry. It goes something like this:
The Legislature has reserved for itself all authority to regulate firearms, except when it specifically grants some of this authority to another state or local entity by statute:
All authority to regulate firearms shall be reserved to the state except where the Legislature specifically delegates responsibility to local authorities or state entities. Unless specifically authorized by the Legislature by statute, a local authority or state entity may not enact or enforce any ordinance, regulation, or rule pertaining to firearms.
They said "any ordinance, regulation, or rule pertaining to firearms" not 'a rule that intentionally targets only firearms' or something more specific like that. If a state entity wanted to pass a rule limiting how much lead, copper, steel, and plastic people were allowed to carry with them, and then used that rule to ban the possession of firearms, it would run afoul of 76-10-500 as I understand it, even though it made no mention of firearms or ammuntion specifically, and purported to deal with another matter altogether. The legislature even reiterated this principle specifically for the U of U because they were having trouble grasping the concept:
Unless specifically authorized by the Legislature by statute, a local authority or state entity may not enact, establish, or enforce any ordinance, regulation, rule, or policy pertaining to firearms that in any way inhibits or restricts the possession or use of firearms on either public or private property.
Lastly, the Legislature has specifically granted the U some very narrowly-defined authority to regulate firearms:
... authorize higher education institutions to establish no more than one secure area at each institution as a hearing room ... but not otherwise restrict the lawful possession or carrying of firearms
After they did grant the U some limited authority in the gun area, they took the extraordinary step of specifying that they may "not otherwise restrict the lawful possession or carrying of firearms" to reiterate for a third time that they can't do anything else, like ban open carry. It doesn't matter if they use their metals-and-plastic weight limit policy or a rule called "it's for the children" or a regulation that says, "the U can decide what's best for its students." If it "pertains to firearms" or "in any way inhibits or restricts the possession or use of firearms" it's a no-go, no matter what they call it.