Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Unanimous Mississippi Supreme Court Finds NRA Worker Protection Law Provides Legal Remedies

Friday, March 25, 2016

Unanimous Mississippi Supreme Court Finds NRA Worker Protection Law Provides Legal Remedies

In 2006, NRA strongly supported the passage of a law in Mississippi that upholds the Magnolia State’s well-established public policy of protecting the right of responsible, law-abiding persons to keep and bear arms for self-defense. The law states that, subject to narrow exceptions, “a public or private employer may not establish, maintain, or enforce any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting a person from transporting or storing a firearm in a locked vehicle in any … designated parking area.” On Thursday, all nine Mississippi Supreme Court justices unanimously held that the law provides an employee who complies with its terms a right of action for unlawful termination.

As in other states, many employees in Mississippi commute long distances to work, work irregular hours, or wish to take advantage of hunting or other sporting opportunities before or after work. Those lawfully transporting firearms in their personal vehicles for self-defense or other lawful purposes could be effectively prevented from doing so, however, by employer policies that seek to control what lawful items employees possess in their cars. 

For example, a female employee who works the second shift at a hospital could not carry a handgun for personal protection during her late night 40 mile drive home if her employer could fire her for having it in her car. Likewise, an employee who wished to spend the morning before his shift in a duck blind near his place of work would not be able to do so if simply having his unloaded shotgun locked in his car’s trunk were cause for termination. 

It may seem like employers and employees could reasonably work out these arrangements, and historically they did. But beginning with a mass firing at an Oklahoma timber company in 2004 over firearms employees kept in their vehicles, employers nationwide increasingly began to crack down on firearms stored in the locked trunks, glove compartments, or toolboxes of cars and trucks parked in employee lots. And because of the strong tradition of “employment at will” in American law – meaning employers generally can fire employees for any or no reason, as they see fit – the employees usually had no recourse.

NRA thus began supporting laws like the one in Mississippi. The rationale behind these laws is simple: if an employer is going to allow employees to park on its property, it shouldn’t be able to micromanage the otherwise lawful items the employees store in their locked personal vehicles, which after all are the employees’ property. Importantly, the laws are limited to the storage of firearms and do not dictate rules that would apply to the carrying or use of firearms outside the vehicle on employer property otherwise.  

Despite the clear language of Mississippi’s law, numerous employers have for years openly defied it. They insisted that because the legislature did not expressly provide for a remedy in the law, they could still continue to enforce parking lot gun bans, even against employees who acted according to the law’s terms.

Thursday’s opinion in the case of Swindol v. Aurora Flight Servs. Corp. conclusively dismisses that argument. Writing for the court, Justice Ann Hannaford Lamar noted that Mississippi’s employment-at-will doctrine was created by the state’s courts and was subject to modification by the state’s legislature. She explained that while the courts themselves had created limited exceptions to the rule, doing so was not necessary in this case because the legislature had already done so. In addition to the worker protection law, the court cited the state constitutional right to arms and an exception to its concealed carry ban for firearms within motor vehicles as establishing the necessary “express legislative action” and “state law prohibitions” to supersede employment-at-will.  

The court also rejected the claim that Swindol’s suit was barred by a clause in the law that states an employer “shall not be liable in a civil action for damages resulting from or arising out of an occurrence involving the transportation, storage, possession or use of a firearm covered by this section.” According to the court, the defendant’s reading of that language would make the general rule of the law useless. The court instead held that the immunity shields employers subject to the law from an employee’s or third party’s actions involving a covered firearm. In other words, employers covered by the law do not thereby assume additional burdens of liability, other than for terminating employees in violation of the law.

We at NRA are pleased to see the court correctly interpret the law and, hopefully, to put an end to many employers’ ongoing defiance in the face of clear legislative directives. A responsible, law-abiding person should never have to choose between the guarantees of the right to keep and bear arms enshrined in the U.S. and most state constitutions and the ability to earn a living.

TRENDING NOW
Gun Control to Be Heard on the Floor of the House of Representatives Next Week

News  

Friday, February 22, 2019

Gun Control to Be Heard on the Floor of the House of Representatives Next Week

As we reported last week, anti-gun members of the House Judiciary Committee voted to move forward with two gun control bills. These bills will be on the House floor next week, so please contact your U.S. ...

Turning a Right into a Privilege: HR 1112 Gives Feds Unfettered Power to Block Gun Sales

News  

Friday, February 15, 2019

Turning a Right into a Privilege: HR 1112 Gives Feds Unfettered Power to Block Gun Sales

H.R. 8, which would criminalize the private transfer of firearms, has received significant attention from the gun rights community. However, H.R. 1112, which purportedly targets the inappropriately-named “Charleston loophole,” is just as insidious an attack ...

What to Make of Crime in England?

News  

Friday, February 22, 2019

What to Make of Crime in England?

Sometimes it’s hard to understand what things are really like “across the pond.” Anti-gun extremists in America reflexively point to England whenever the discussion about adding restrictions, and especially banning firearms, arises here in the ...

Bloomberg’s Everytown: Criminalizing Private Transfers is About Creating “Culture of Compliance”

News  

Friday, February 22, 2019

Bloomberg’s Everytown: Criminalizing Private Transfers is About Creating “Culture of Compliance”

If you were still under the impression that gun control was about giving law enforcement the tools to target violent criminals, think again. At a February 12 hearing concerning Nevada Senate Bill 143 that criminalizes the private ...

Pelosi Claims Future President Could Use “National Emergency” to Target Guns

News  

Friday, February 22, 2019

Pelosi Claims Future President Could Use “National Emergency” to Target Guns

First, gun control supporters supposedly wanted a “national conversation” on gun violence. Then they purported to want Congress to enact so-called “common sense gun reform.” Now some anti-gun lawmakers are dispensing with any pretense of ...

The Truth about Gun Sales and H.R. 8

News  

Friday, February 22, 2019

The Truth about Gun Sales and H.R. 8

As Congress considers H.R. 8, let’s consider some of the arguments made in support of so-called “universal” background checks.  Anti-gun organizations regularly claim that criminals acquire firearms online. Everytown and its predecessor, Mayors Against Illegal ...

H.R. 8 Markup: Liberal Democrats Markup Gun Control Legislation

News  

Friday, February 15, 2019

H.R. 8 Markup: Liberal Democrats Markup Gun Control Legislation

The Nancy Pelosi Speaker Era 2.0 continued on Wednesday, Feb. 13, with a markup of H.R 8, the “universal” background checks bill, in the House Judiciary Committee. Following on the heels of last week’s Judiciary Committee hearing, the same committee held a markup on ...

California: City of Los Angeles Discriminates Against NRA Supporters

Friday, February 15, 2019

California: City of Los Angeles Discriminates Against NRA Supporters

This week, the City Council Members of Los Angeles showed their extreme distain of the Second Amendment, the NRA and our supporters.  On February 12, the City Council held the first reading of a proposed ordinance that ...

Texas: Setting the Record Straight On "Red Flag" Legislation

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

Texas: Setting the Record Straight On "Red Flag" Legislation

Over the holiday weekend, a conservative "taxpayer watchdog" group sent out an email to its contact list which gave the impression that NRA-ILA supports "red flag" legislation in Texas.  One wonders what the organization hoped to accomplish by confusing and attempting to divide ...

Another Study Blames Guns, Excludes Reality

News  

Friday, February 15, 2019

Another Study Blames Guns, Excludes Reality

A study published in Preventative Medicine by Yu Lu and Jeff R. Temple concludes that “the majority of mental health symptoms examined were not related to gun violence. Instead, access to firearms was the primary culprit.”

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.