After a lively debate on the Wyoming House floor Thursday, a bill aimed at keeping federal agents from seizing Wyoming residents’ guns passed its final vote.
Having previously passed the Senate, Senate File 101, the Second Amendment Protection Act (SAPA), passed the House on third reading by a vote 40 to 21.
It must pass concurrence with both chambers before heading to Gov. Mark Gordon’s desk. Gordon vetoed a similar bill during the 2025 legislative session.
If it becomes law, SAPA will forbid Wyoming law enforcement officers from assisting federal agents in seizing residents’ firearms, ammunition or firearms accessories.
It would also allow residents whose guns have been unjustly seized to seek civil damages.
‘Sword Of Damocles’
Law enforcement officials say SAPA would undermine their joint operations with federal agents on drug busts, tracking illegal immigrants and similar cases.
During debate leading up to the vote on Thursday, dissenting lawmakers reiterated law enforcement’s concerns.
Rep. Art Washut, R-Casper, a retired peace officer, said the bill rests on a false premise.
“A false premise that the only way we can keep our Wyoming peace officers from violating your constitutional rights and your next-door neighbor’s constitutional rights is to hang the sword of Damocles over their heads with a $50,000 civil judgment on it,” he said.
Supporters, including Rep. Robert Wharff, R-Evanston, argued that the bill doesn’t disparage Wyoming officers; it’s intended to protect Wyomingites from overzealous feds.
SAPA clearly defines that, he said.
“If an order is ever given federally to come seize firearms, ammunition or accessories, our law enforcement can’t help them,” he said.
A mirror bill, House Bill 130, failed on third reading before the Senate on Wednesday by a vote of 18 to 13.
Amendments Rejected
The House rejected two last-minute amendments to SAPA.
One would have replaced the term “interested party” with “aggrieved party” in relation to who could file a civil action under SAPA.
Proponents argued that would have protected law enforcement agencies from frivolous lawsuits.
Another amendment would have been reinserted wording into the bill clarifying that Wyoming officers can’t cooperate in unconstitutional activities related to firearms confiscation.
That clarity was needed, Washut said, speaking in favor of the amendment.
“It does a disservice to our law enforcement personnel if we say, ‘you’re going to be subjected to the conditions of this bill, even though you don’t know whether or not the actions you are engaged in are going to be determined to be constitutional or unconstitutional at some point in the future,’” he said.
Arguing against the amendment, Rep. Jeremy Haroldson, R-Wheatland, said the exact meaning of the term “constitutional” could be argued in future legal actions, and muddy the purpose of the bill.
The purpose of SAPA should be straightforward, he said.
“So, if the federal government says bump stocks (an accessory to modify semi-automatic rifles) are illegal – you need to go collect them all, a sheriff goes, ‘honestly, our laws state that we can’t. You can come do your own federal laws here, but you’re not going to do them with our crew,’” Haroldson said.
Rep. Ken Pendergraft, R-Sheridan, said the constitutionality of gun rights is made clear in both the U.S. and Wyoming constitutions.
“I hear a lot of, ‘I’m all in favor of the Second Amendment, but…’ The second amendment says what it says. The Wyoming constitution says what it says,” he said.
‘Boogeyman’
Opponents argued that SAPA would put a law on the books addressing a problem Wyoming will likely never have.
“I would contend that this bill is a boogeyman. This bill does not solve a Wyoming problem,” said Rep. Trey Sherwood, D-Laramie.
Washut noted federal law forbids anyone convicted of domestic violence to possess firearms, but Wyoming doesn’t have a statute related to that.
So, law enforcement officers worry whether SAPA would forbid them from taking a firearm from a suspect to defuse domestic violence situations.
“Our officers will obey the law; they will follow the constitution. But to take away from them the ability to even cooperate with federal law enforcement officers on a domestic violence case like this, it’s just wrong,” he said.
Wharff countered that SAPA wouldn’t inhibit Wyoming officers from disarming domestic violence suspects, or any others involved in violent crimes.
That’s because the primary call-out would be for the crime of domestic violence, and illegal possession of a firearm would be a secondary matter, he said.
SAPA addresses only federally led operations with the primary and sole intent to seize guns, he said.
Mark Heinz can be reached at mark@cowboystatedaily.com.
