Star-Tribune Editorial Board

There may be some occasions when the state of Wyoming is justified in challenging the federal government in court. But before doing so, state officials would be wise to consider whether the issue is really worth doing battle over, and if there's a good chance of prevailing.

It doesn't appear that state officials did such an analysis with regard to the federal government's objection to part of a state law that seeks to allow people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to retain their gun rights. As a result, Wyoming has now lost twice in federal court.

It's time to drop the appeals and change the law to acknowledge that disarming people convicted of domestic violence is a good idea.

Convicted felons traditionally have been banned from owning guns, for obvious reasons. But in 1996, Congress expanded that ban to include misdemeanor domestic violence convictions. Wyoming responded by creating a process to help some of those people regain their gun rights, if they can show they've reformed themselves.

When the issue came before his court, U.S. District Judge Alan Johnson of Wyoming correctly recognized that the state law violated the federal statute. He ruled in favor of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosions, which had rejected the state law.

Last week, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Johnson's ruling. If Wyoming doesn't want to comply, its only option now is to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Fortunately, state Attorney General Bruce Salzburg said he's unlikely to recommend asking the nation's high court to review the case.

The ATF is now armed with two federal court rulings in its favor, along with a big stick of its own. State-issued concealed-carry licenses let more than 10,000 Wyoming citizens bypass federal background checks for firearms purchases. If Wyoming were to persist in arming convicted abusers, ATF could stop recognizing the Wyoming permits.

There is some irony in how Wyoming passed the law to restore firearms rights. It was sponsored by Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, who contended some prosecutors were hesitant to pursue domestic violence charges against first-time offenders because of the "excessive" punishment.

Giving reformed offenders a chance to reclaim their gun rights would make authorities less reluctant to prosecute domestic violence, Case argued.

But the Legislature made a technical mistake in its law. It said domestic violence misdemeanors could be expunged for firearms purposes only, while remaining on file to enhance punishment for subsequent convictions. That's the provision to which ATF objected, and which two federal courts also have now found to be improper. In essence, if you're going to allow expungement for only one purpose, it's not truly an expungement, the rulings said.

The Legislature could rewrite the law to allow complete expungement. That would get around the court rulings.

But that would be the wrong approach. It would be irresponsible to completely cleanse domestic abusers' criminal records -- especially if the purpose is to let them buy guns.

A national study by the Center for Gun Policy and Research found that women's risk of being killed in abusive relationships increases fivefold when their male partners have guns.

Remember: This issue is not about protecting the gun rights of law-abiding citizens. We're talking here about people who have been convicted of violent crimes.

Fighting the federal government is a good way to curry political points in Wyoming. When the cause is just, it may also be worthwhile. In this case, it definitely isn't.