The latest shot has been fired in what may be Gov. Rick Scott's dumbest legal battle yet.
Earlier this month a federal judge struck down the so-called "Docs vs. Glocks" law that Scott had signed into law last year. Now Scott has ordered the Florida Department of Health to appeal the decision. Keep in mind, all these court battles over silly, controversial laws are costing you, the tax payer, money.
The law was introduced by Rep. Jason Brodeur, R-Sanford, after he claims a constituent complained that his doctor had asked about his gun ownership. With little evidence that this was a widespread problem and an even less explanation of why doctors asking patients about gun ownership was a problem in the first place, the bill got the backing of the National Rifle Association.
When the NRA says "jump," Republican legislators in Florida don't even bother asking "how high?" They just jump as high as they possibly can. It's just a reflex by now.
Doctors, of course, were pissed and claimed their First Amendment rights were being violated, and several medical groups filed a lawsuit against the law.
A federal judge took one look at the thing and was basically like, "Uh, seriously guys? You seriously think this is a constitutional law? Really? Come on now." The judge placed an injunction on the law in September, and finally struck it down earlier this month.
But Scott wants to appeal the decision, because of course he does. Here's a statement he released this morning:
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
"The Department of Health today filed an appeal to the federal court decision blocking enforcement of the Firearm Owner's Privacy Act. This law was carefully crafted to respect the First Amendment while ensuring a patient's constitutional right to own or possess a firearm without discrimination. I signed this legislation into law because I believe it is constitutional and I will continue to defend it."
If someone could show us a pattern of people being "discriminated" against by doctors because they owned a gun, we might at least understand why Scott and the RPOF is so gung-ho about defending this law. But no one will, because no such pattern actually exists. This is all just idealistic nonsense designed to appease the powerful yet apparently easily scared gun-toting voting block.
The timing of the announcement however couldn't have been worse for Scott. The Orlando Sentinel revealed this morning that legal challenges to Scott's wacky laws have already cost tax payers close to $1 million. The legal bill so far for this case is $28,000. That number is now sure to rise.