>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Savannah Mayor Van Johnson, a Democrat who has gained a reputation for dismissing state authority, pushed the ordinance through in April 2024 with unanimous support from the city council.
Despite repeated warnings, Johnson moved forward anyway.
The restrictions included steep penalties—up to a $1,000 fine and 30 days behind bars—for gun owners whose stolen firearms came from vehicles that weren’t locked or didn’t store guns in trunks, compartments, or behind seats.
But state law is clear.
Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr sent a formal letter in May 2024 telling city leadership that the ordinance violated Georgia Code § 16-11-173, which prevents local governments from dictating anything related to “the possession, ownership, transport, (or) carrying” of firearms.
Johnson’s response? Pure political arrogance.
He brazenly declared: “Sue us. We’ll go to the Supreme Court and let the United States Supreme Court say,” followed by “The gun ordinance doesn’t go anywhere. So, sorry.”
In other words, the mayor dared the state to stop him—and he kept enforcing the illegal ordinance for more than a year.
Johnson repeatedly justified his ordinance by citing statistics about guns stolen from unlocked vehicles. But Judge Huffman made it clear that emotional appeals cannot override constitutional rights.
He wrote: “Concerns over firearms stolen from vehicles and later used in violent crime are in fact concerning. Good intentions, however, do not immunize legislation from constitutional scrutiny.”
In the ruling, the judge didn’t merely rely on preemption law.
He also determined the ordinance violated the Second Amendment because it placed burdens on “conduct covered by the plain text” of the right to bear arms.
That double-barreled reasoning makes any future appeal from the city a near impossibility.
Georgia’s preemption law has been in place since 1989 to prevent local politicians from creating conflicting firearm rules across the state. Johnson’s ordinance was the exact scenario the law was designed to stop.
Attorney General Chris Carr—who is campaigning for governor in 2026—applauded the judge’s decision, saying: “This is a major victory for law-abiding gun owners, who shouldn’t be punished for the actions of criminals [and] thieves.”
Politically, the timing is brutal for Johnson.
Carr has made defending the Second Amendment a central part of his campaign.
Beating a Democrat mayor who openly defied gun laws couldn’t be a more perfect setup for Republican voters heading into 2026.
But as expected, Johnson refuses to accept reality.
He told reporters Wednesday that the city would continue enforcing the ordinance anyway, claiming: “We’ve had this in existence now for quite some time, and we have reduced the number of guns stolen from unlocked vehicles in Savannah.”
This, even after a judge formally declared the ordinance unconstitutional.
Johnson’s actions mirror what Democrats in many cities are doing—passing gun-control measures that violate state law, hoping few residents will have the ability or standing to challenge them.
In fact, Savannah already faced a similar challenge in 2024 from a Jesup man named Clarence Belt. That case was dismissed because Belt didn’t live in Savannah and hadn’t been cited.
But Papp’s situation was different—he had charges, which gave him direct standing.
This pattern reveals how Democrat-run cities weaponize the legal system:
They pass unconstitutional laws, enforce them on the public, and gamble that few citizens will challenge them in court.
Meanwhile, the city collects fines, intimidates lawful gun owners, and tramples rights in the process.
State lawmakers attempted in 2025 to pass a bill allowing anyone cited under Savannah’s gun ordinance to sue for up to $25,000 in damages. The measure didn’t pass—but thanks to Judge Huffman’s ruling, those lawsuits may now be on the table anyway.
With the ordinance officially unconstitutional, every person cited under it may be able to seek dismissal and pursue claims for wrongful prosecution.
Attorney General Carr summed it up perfectly:
“No matter how much the Mayor disagrees with our laws, he cannot openly infringe on the Second Amendment rights of our citizens. Progressive politics aren’t a defense for government overreach.”
And on Wednesday, Mayor Johnson learned that lesson the hard way—when a judge used just two devastating words to destroy his gun-control scheme: “void” and “unenforceable.”
