On 21 December 1843, the , Illinois, city council, presided over by JS as mayor, passed an ordinance partially suspending the execution of external legal process in Nauvoo. The ordinance was apparently a response to the ongoing conflict over the kidnapping of member . At a meeting on 8 December, the city council passed an ordinance that criminalized attempts to arrest JS or others in Nauvoo on charges related to the “ difficulties.” Anyone found in violation of the ordinance could be arrested with or without legal process and imprisoned for life. At that same meeting, JS suggested that the city “pass an ordina[n]ce to suspend the operation of the statu[t]es” in Nauvoo, likely a reference to potentially suspending all legal process originating outside the city. By 21 December, the city council determined to follow JS’s suggestion.

The City Council’s efforts to curtail or control any legal process originating outside the city reflected the burgeoning conflict with local antagonists. While the earlier ordinance attempted to address the threat of extradition or kidnappings to , the 21 December ordinance indicates that JS and others in Nauvoo viewed writs and warrants issued by external courts of law as potential tools of retribution against them. To combat this threat, JS and other civic leaders sought not only to shore up Nauvoo’s ability to control such process but also to interfere with external legal process. To protect Latter-day Saints from what they saw as unjust legal retribution, JS and others were also reportedly willing to engage in extralegal activities. During the night of 20–21 December, about ten Nauvoo residents—apparently acting on JS’s orders—crossed into and attempted to prevent Iowans and Mark Childs from traveling to Missouri to testify against before the Clark County grand jury.

Meanwhile, JS and the city council continued their efforts to safeguard through additional city ordinances. At noon on 21 December, the Nauvoo City Council assembled for its regularly appointed session. A significant portion of the meeting consisted of revising and approving a memorial requesting that Congress grant all the rights and powers of a federal territory to Nauvoo—another attempt to establish Nauvoo’s political and legal independence. The council then passed the ordinance controlling legal process in the city. Typically, legal process, such as subpoenas, warrants, and other legal writs, originated from county justices of the peace or circuit courts and was served by constables or sheriffs, respectively. Nauvoo’s 21 December ordinance, however, stripped these law officers of the authority to serve writs in the city, stating that any writ or warrant originating outside the city had to be approved and endorsed by the mayor and executed by the city marshal. While it expanded Nauvoo’s jurisdiction over external legal process beyond the 8 December ordinance, the 21 December ordinance also significantly lessened the potential prison sentence and added a small fine.

The city recorder, , prepared an initial draft of the 21 December ordinance, which he then revised. The draft and its revisions were apparently made prior to the city council meeting, at which the bill was presented to the council, read three times, and passed without discussion or amendment. Once the city council passed the ordinance, Richards signed the revised draft both as city recorder and on behalf of JS as mayor. Richards subsequently made a fair copy, featured here, in Nauvoo’s city council minute book.

Although the 21 December ordinance granted ’s city government even greater power to control legal process, it did not receive as much national attention as the 8 December ordinance. The new ordinance did add considerable tension to the already strained relationship between the citizens of Nauvoo and the rest of . In early January, residents in , Hancock County, began violently opposing law officers from Nauvoo, explaining that “the old citizens felt disposed to stop the execution of processers [process], issuing from” Nauvoo in retaliation for the 21 December ordinance. JS attempted to alleviate the concerns of a delegation from Carthage, claiming that the “nature and reason of the ordinance . . . was to prevent kidnapping under the prete[n]ce of Law, or process, & to further the apprehension of theives &c in this city.” He called on the city council to pass an amendment to the 21 December ordinance “so that the public might unde[r]stand the ordinance in its true light.” The new third section of the ordinance clarified “that nothing in the foregoing ordinance shall be so construed as to prevent, hinder or thwart the designs of Justice, or to retard the civil officers of the State or County in the discharge of their official duties, but to aid and assist them within the limits of this City.” A month later, in February 1844, the city council repealed the 21 December ordinance at JS’s recommendation.