A coalition of 24 Republican attorneys general have signed on to a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries calling for a floor vote and passage of H.R. 38, known as the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. The AGs, all of whom serve in states that have adopted their own constitutional carry or permitless carry laws, say they “know firsthand that recognizing a broad right of concealed carry among law-abiding Americans promotes public safety and respects the fundamental liberties of our constituents”, and want to see that right extended across state lines. 

The letter acknowledges one of the talking points against H.R. 38 is that the bill would intrude upon “states’ rights,”, which they call “a concept that would have been completely unfamiliar, if not repugnant, to some of these same pundits in any other context.” So many Americans are ignorant of our history that a lot of them will be unaware that the phrase was deployed for decades in defense of Jim Crow laws. The fact is that citizens have rights, while governments have powers… and no state has the power to violate the fundamental, enumerated rights of we the people.

Regardless, the AGs argue that H.R. 38 doesn’t change any state law nor mandate how states must “provide for lawful concealed carry within their borders.”

States are free under H.R. 38 to establish independent requirements for any concealed carry credential issued by the state and make publicly owned property off-limits to carry. They may also (within constitutional limits) establish their own rules of behavior concerning the display, brandishing, discharge, or use of guns in public, as well as the terms of defensive force. H.R. 38 additionally recognizes the right of property owners to establish their own policies for the carrying of guns on private property. 

So what does H.R. 38 do? The crux of the legislation is this:

Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document containing a photograph of the person, and who is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides, may possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machine gun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State that—

“(1) has a statute under which residents of the State may apply for a license or permit to carry a concealed firearm; or

“(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms by residents of the State for lawful purposes.

H.R. 38 recognizes that more than half the states in the nation no longer require a concealed carry permit in order to lawfully bear arms. So long as the gun owner in question can legally possess their firearm they can also carry it. Instead of forcing gun owners to obtain a carry permit solely for the purposes of reciprocity, H.R. 38 would allow those residents of permitless carry states to lawfully carry in every state of the Union. 

The A.G.’s acknowledge that “critics of H.R. 38 complain that it would force states with strict permitting standards to accommodate carriers from jurisdictions with more lax requirements”, which is true. But as they point out, “some states—despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings to the contrary—make getting a carry license as expensive, burdensome, and bureaucratic as possible, simply to discourage citizens from exercising the right.” 

That’s true for both residents and non-residents alike. Some states like Hawaii don’t even offer a way for non-residents to obtain a carry permit, while others require non-residents to undergo state-specific training courses that might not exist where they live. If I want to lawfully bear arms in Massachusetts, for example, I need to submit a non-resident firearms license application along with a certificate proving I’ve taken a Massachusetts Basic Firearms Safety Course in person to the Massachusetts Firearms Records Bureau. 

I’m not aware of that Massachusetts course being taught anywhere in the state of Virginia, so I’d have to make at least one trip to Massachusetts to take the mandated training, obtain my certificate, and submit my application in person; a journey that would cost me hundreds of dollars in needless expenses just to be able to exercise a fundamental right in what was once the cradle of liberty. 

There was a time when universal recognition of a state-issued carry license would have sufficed for national reciprocity, but with 29 permitless carry states H.R. 38 is a much better way to ensure that the right to bear arms isn’t treated as a second-class right. The odds of the bill getting 60 votes in the Senate may be slim, but House Republicans can and should do their part to advance this measure and allow it to receive a vote on the House floor.