Appeals court upholds ruling striking down gun law
Brian Bakst, Associated Press
April 13, 2005
The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld on Tuesday a lower court's ruling that struck down a law that expanded access to concealed weapons permits because the Legislature passed the law improperly.
The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the court was a blow to advocates of the liberalized gun law. They had backed the 2003 law, which removed most of the power of police chiefs and county sheriffs to deny the permits. They immediately said they'd appeal to the state Supreme Court.
Unless the high court reverses this ruling or the Legislature passes a new bill, permits will be granted under the old rules. That means authorities can determine whether a person has an occupational or safety need before giving permission to carry a gun in public.
In 2003, the Legislature tacked the bill onto another piece of legislation to get it through the state Senate, which resisted voting on the measure as a standalone bill. It eventually passed was signed into law by Gov. Tim Pawlenty.
The law was soon challenged by group of churches the city of Minneapolis and some nonprofits, who argued the process violated a constitutional rule that the parts of bill be related.
The three-judge panel of the appeals court agreed.
"It is clear that (the Personal Protection Act), which regulates firearms, contains a totally different subject matter from the regulatory provision and from the Department of Natural Resources found in'' the other bill, wrote Judge R.A. Randall.
The law passed on the back of a Department of Natural Resources bill covering park fees, hunting firearm safety and other outdoors issues. The gun measure was added to the DNR bill as part of a maneuver to force a vote in the Senate.
In the state's 148-year history, only five laws have been overturned for violating the single-subject clause of the Minnesota Constitution. Randall said he wasn't ruling on the gun law's merits but simply interpreting the constitution.
"If the legislature deems it an impediment that perhaps one bill gets shot down on an average of once every 20 or 30 years, they, not the courts, hold the keys to amending the Minnesota Constitution and repealing the single-subject requirement,'' he wrote.
He was joined on the panel by Judges David Minge and Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks.
John Caile, a spokesman for Concealed Carry Reform Now, which championed the new law, rejected the court's finding that the conceal-carry law's passage violated the single-subject rule.
"The bill was one of the most highly publicized in years, and at the end of the day, as the legislators did their jobs, does anyone seriously think that a single member of the House or Senate didn't know what they were voting for?''
When the Personal Protection Act was in force, more than 25,000 people took advantage and got a permit before Ramsey County Judge John Finley declared the law unconstitutional. His ruling suspended the new law and reverted the permitting process back to the prior law. Five-year permits issued under the 2003 law remain valid.
