The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled (5-2) that the state's preemption law is valid. The City of Cleveland had sued over the 2007 law that replaced the confusing plethora of local laws concerning firearms. In that claim, Cleveland unsuccessfully made the case that the state and federal government had not done enough to regulate self-defense rights, leaving the city free to regulate everyone who happened to be inside its city limits.
That argument did not prevail. The majority opinion rejecting the position stated "A comprehensive enactment need not regulate every aspect of disputed conduct, nor must it regulate that conduct in a particularly invasive fashion."
In the March, 2007 legislation (R.C. 9.68) the law creates "uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition."
The ruling means the Buckeye Firearms Foundation's lawsuit against Cleveland will be reactivated. That suit seeks a temporary restraining order and permanent injunction to stop the City of Cleveland from prosecuting law-abiding gun owners under local ordinances that cover gun ownership and concealed carry. The lawsuit also asks the court to declare 20 different local ordinances unconstitutional due to the state pre-emption regulation.