## Facts

- After a nearby mass shooting, the City of Edmonds enacted an ordinance requiring residents to store firearms safely when not in use and to keep them from unauthorized access, including by minors.
- The ordinance imposed civil penalties when a firearm was not stored safely and was accessible to an unauthorized person, without requiring proof of injury.
- Washington’s firearm preemption statute, RCW 9.41.290, declares the state “fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation” and limits municipalities to firearm ordinances “specifically authorized by state law.”
- Washington voters adopted Initiative 1639, which criminalized unsafe storage in defined circumstances but did not mandate how or where a firearm must be stored.
- Individual gun owners and gun-rights organizations sued for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging the ordinance was preempted and that they were directly subject to its requirements and penalties.
- The trial court found standing and justiciability but upheld the ordinance on the merits; the Court of Appeals reversed and held the storage provisions preempted.

## Issues

1. Whether plaintiffs who had not been cited under the ordinance nonetheless had standing and presented a justiciable controversy to seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
2. Whether RCW 9.41.290 preempts a municipal ordinance mandating safe storage of firearms and imposing civil penalties for violations.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court held the case was justiciable and plaintiffs had standing because they owned and stored firearms and were directly regulated by the ordinance, creating a credible risk of enforcement.
- The court held RCW 9.41.290 expressly preempts the field of firearms regulation and that firearm storage requirements fall within that preempted field as a form of regulating firearm possession.
- The court rejected the argument that Initiative 1639 left room for supplemental local storage mandates; the initiative’s limited approach did not specifically authorize municipalities to impose broader storage rules.
- The court affirmed the Court of Appeals and invalidated the ordinance’s storage provisions as preempted and unenforceable.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Washington Constitution, municipal ordinances may not conflict with state general laws, including laws enacted by initiative.
- Express field-preemption language (“fully occupies and preempts the entire field”) bars local regulation within the covered subject area absent specific statutory authorization.
- Firearm “possession” regulation under RCW 9.41.290 includes requirements governing how firearms must be stored.
- Plaintiffs may bring a preenforcement challenge when they are subject to a regulation and face a credible threat of enforcement, making the dispute actual and judicially determinable.

## Conclusion

The Washington Supreme Court held that Edmonds’ safe-storage ordinance was preempted by RCW 9.41.290’s express field preemption of firearms regulation and that affected gun owners and organizations could sue before any citation issued because the ordinance directly regulated them and posed a credible enforcement risk.


Bass v. City of Edmonds, 508 P.3d 172 (Wash. 2022)