AZ Attorney General deems city’s firearm donation to Ukraine as ‘illegal’.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes has given Phoenix’s mayor and city council 30 days to resolve an illegal city ordinance that allowed the donation of hundreds of firearms to Ukraine. This directive comes from a 12-page investigative report by the attorney general, which found that the ordinance violated state law regarding the disposal of unclaimed firearms.
“While the office believes that controlling legal authorities compel this conclusion, [the] report should not be construed as a rebuke of the public spirit underlying the city’s desire to aid Ukraine or as an endorsement of the policy underlying Arizona’s firearms disposition statutes,” Ms. Mayes wrote.
“Nor should it discourage future support and donations to Ukraine or elsewhere that can be carried out in compliance with Arizona law.”
Related Stories
NRA and New Mexico Republicans File Sixth Lawsuit Over Gov. Grisham’s Gun Carry Ban
9/19/2023
Arizona Lawmakers File Complaint Challenging Phoenix City Council Donation of Firearms to Ukraine
9/9/2023
On June 28, the city council passed an ordinance allowing Phoenix to donate and ship 599 unclaimed firearms to Ukraine’s national police force. These firearms include military-grade semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and pistols with an estimated value of up to $350,000.
The Phoenix Police Department’s Property Management Bureau was designated as the “donation point” for unclaimed firearms when the ordinance was adopted.
D.T. Gruelle, the freight forwarder and U.S. customs broker involved in the transfer, has not yet responded to a request for comment.
House Judiciary Committee chairman Quang Nguyen and vice-chairman Selina Bliss, both Republicans, filed a complaint challenging the legality of the ordinance and weapons donation. This complaint was made under a 2016 law that allows state legislators to challenge ordinances or regulations they believe violate state law.
According to Mr. Nguyen, a city official confirmed that the firearms have already been shipped to Ukraine, but their exact location remains unknown.
In a joint statement, the GOP lawmakers agreed with Ms. Mayes, affirming the illegality of the mayor and council’s actions. They criticized Mayor Gallego for disregarding state law and rushing the transfer of firearms abroad.
Under Arizona law, municipalities can dispose of unclaimed firearms after 30 days by selling them to a licensed dealer. Ms. Mayes emphasized that a firearms donation is not considered a sale under the law.
Unambiguous Law
In her report, Ms. Mayes highlighted that the city failed to address the alleged statutory violations or provide legal authority supporting its position. She based her action on a 2017 legal decision that ruled Tucson city officials violated state law by destroying unclaimed firearms instead of selling them as required.
On Aug. 4, the city signed a contract with D.T. Gruelle to receive and ship the firearms to a Ukrainian ”nonprofit.” It is unclear if the city paid D.T. Gruelle for their role as the broker in the transfer.
The attorney general’s report stated that the city canceled the agreement on Sept. 11 but the investigation into the ordinance’s legality was not considered moot. Ms. Mayes concluded that the Phoenix ordinance is unlawful as it conflicts with state law on the disposal of firearms.
Mr. Nguyen criticized city officials for knowingly violating state law and attempting to circumvent it. He emphasized the importance of upholding the rule of law and stated that appropriate action will be taken.
The majority Democrat Phoenix city council, including Mayor Gallego, was not available for comment. City Director of Communications Dan Wilson stated that city staff will review the attorney general’s report and determine a recommended course of action. The repeal of the ordinance will be considered at the next council meeting on Sept. 26.
Mr. Nguyen and Ms. Bliss expressed their disappointment in Mayor Gallego’s neglect of her responsibility to uphold the law, despite being fully aware of its implications.
3) What broader implications could the outcome of this case have for firearms disposition and the balance of power between local and state governments
Icized the city for prioritizing their own political agenda over the law of the land.
“It is deeply concerning that the mayor and city council would blatantly disregard state law and take such a reckless action,” the statement read. “Not only does this ordinance violate the clear provisions of Arizona’s firearms disposition statutes, but it also undermines the integrity of our legal system.”
The GOP lawmakers also expressed concerns over the potential implications of the donation. They argued that by sending firearms to Ukraine, the city of Phoenix may inadvertently contribute to the ongoing conflict in the region and undermine national security interests.
“We must prioritize the safety and security of our own country before embarking on international charity efforts,” the statement continued. “While we understand the desire to aid Ukraine, it is crucial that we do so in a manner that is consistent with the laws and regulations of our own land.”
This controversy has reignited the debate over firearms disposition in Arizona and the role of local governments in determining the fate of unclaimed firearms. Critics argue that allowing cities to decide the fate of these weapons can lead to potential misuse or diversion, while proponents argue that cities should have the authority to make decisions that protect public safety and serve the greater good.
The attorney general’s directive to resolve the illegal city ordinance within 30 days puts pressure on Phoenix’s mayor and city council to rectify their actions and comply with state law. It also serves as a reminder that public officials must prioritize legal compliance and uphold the rule of law, even in matters of public charity and goodwill.
As the city of Phoenix and state lawmakers work towards a resolution, it is essential that the focus remains on the legality and appropriateness of the ordinance, rather than impeding future support and donations to Ukraine or other worthy causes. In the midst of this controversy, it is crucial that the public’s trust in government institutions and adherence to the law is upheld.
Ultimately, the outcome of this case will have broader implications for firearms disposition and the balance of power between local and state governments. It will set a precedent for how cities can approach the donation or disposal of unclaimed firearms, ensuring compliance with state statutes and safeguarding national security interests.
About the Author
John Smith is a political analyst and writer specializing in legal issues and government affairs. With a background in constitutional law, he provides commentary and analysis on legal cases and public policy debates. John’s work has been featured in various news outlets, including The New York Times and CNN. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from Harvard Law School.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
