A young girl, whose father refused to give her name or place of residence, is embraced by her father at the gun rally held at Pittsburgh's City-County Building on Monday, Jan. 7, 2019.

Across the state in Pittsburgh on Monday, hundreds of pro-gun protesters  — many of whom were armed — gathered to loudly oppose bills inspired by a massacre at a synagogue just a few miles away.

Pa. Rep. Aaron Bernstine, a Beaver County Republican, explained the proposals to the crowd. There’s legislation that would ban assault weapons, a phrase widely used to describe semi-automatic firearms but decried by Bernstine as a “made-up, unicorn, snowflake term.” There’s also a bill that would prohibit high-capacity magazines and bump stocks. A third proposal seemed to particularly incense Bernstine.

“Are we in favor,” he said, incredulously, “of allowing the confiscation of individual firearms without the due process of law?”

“No!” the crowd shouted back.

He was describing extreme risk protection order legislation — aka red flag laws.

There are two red flag proposals currently on the table in the state Senate, one introduced by Republican Tom Killion of the Philadelphia suburbs and the other by Pittsburgh Democrat Wayne Fontana.

Neither bill’s actual text has been released, but in general, these laws allow courts to temporarily confiscate guns from a person believed to be an imminent danger to themselves or others. Eight states have passed legislation empowering law enforcement, as well as family and household members, to petition for these orders. In Maryland, certain health-care workers also have that ability.

Proponents say red flag laws could prevent mass shootings like the one at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue, and studies have shown this type of legislation is effective at preventing suicides by gun. Nearly 1,000 people in Pennsylvania died that way in 2016.

In the General Assembly, where any legislation that restricts access to firearms usually faces an uphill battle, there seems to be bipartisan support for this. Last session, a bill introduced by State Rep. Todd Stephens, a Montgomery County Republican, was co-sponsored by 20 Democrats and 11 Republicans.

But Bernstine and other lawmakers who revere the Second Amendment aren’t alone in their opposition to a statewide red flag bill. In fact, this issue has created some strange bedfellows in Pennsylvania.

The NRA and ACLU on the same side?

That the NRA came out against Stephens’ legislation last year is unsurprising, but the Pa. chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union also released a memo opposing the bill for several reasons.

“As well-intentioned as this legislation is, its breadth and its lenient standards for both petitioning for and granting an ERPO [protection order] are cause for concern,” the memo states. “People not charged with a crime should not be subject to undue deprivations of liberty interests in the absence of a clear, compelling, and immediate showing of need.”

Liz Randol, ACLU-PA’s legislative director and the author of the memo, told Billy Penn the organization isn’t opposed on principle to the concept. The ACLU was neutral on a red flag bill introduced last year in Colorado, while it came out strongly against Rhode Island’s.

But as originally introduced, Stephens’ bill raised due process concerns by expanding the use of search and seizure without a hearing and set up the potential for overreach by law enforcement, Randol said. It also put the burden of proof on the subject of the order to prove “by clear and convincing evidence” that they’re no longer a danger.

Stephens’ bill was thoroughly amended in the Judiciary Committee to not give police an automatic search warrant, require the risk be “imminent,” and reduce the criminal penalties for violating an order.

The Trace, a nonpartisan national news site that covers guns, characterized the amendments as Stephens watering down the bill at the behest of the NRA — despite many of the concerns being shared by the ACLU.

That became a moot point when Stephens’ bill failed to get a full House vote before the session ended in November. Now lawmakers who support red flag legislation will have to start all over again.

What comes next

Philly’s Killion said his legislation will be modeled off Stephens’ amended bill. While he hasn’t heard from the NRA yet, Killion said he worked with the group last session on his proposal to tighten requirements around the surrender of firearms by people suspected of domestic abuse.

“Out of the gate, the NRA was opposed,” Killion said. “A lot of my colleagues were opposed.”

But the NRA ended up coming out as neutral on the bill, and it passed the Senate unanimously. The language from Killion’s bill was folded into a House version, which was signed into law by Gov. Tom Wolf.

That’s the model Killion plans to use moving forward on his red flag bill. “I think this makes sense,” he said.

Stephens also plans to re-introduce his amended legislation, and should have a memo seeking co-sponsors out within the next few weeks. “I plan to aggressively pursue it this session,” he said. “As more gun owners understand the details of this bill and all the due process that it provides that’s absent in current law, more and more of them are embracing this concept.”

Notably, seven of the Republicans who co-sponsored Stephens’ legislation are gone, most of them defeated in the Democratic sweep of the Philadelphia suburbs. Stephens held on to his seat by less than 1,000 votes.

The Senate likewise saw the retirement or defeat of many moderate Republicans from the Philly suburbs, including criminal justice reform champion Stewart Greenleaf. The absence of those moderates, Killion said, means “a little more work for me.”

Sarah Anne Hughes is based in Harrisburg for The Incline and Billy Penn as the sites’ first-ever state capitol reporter and is a 2018 corps member for Report for America, a new initiative that seeks...