The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's ruling that Minnesota's 2003 Conceal and Carry law was unconstitutional. The law, which was passed in 2003, was part of a country-wide effort by the NRA to loosen the restrictions on concealed weapon permits. In July of 2004 a judge
struck down the law as unconstitutional. The
Appeals Court's unanimous ruling ensures that the law does not go back into effect unless the State Supreme Court rules otherwise.
In the opinion, Judge R.A. Randall writes that the Court of Appeals was not ruling on the gun law's merits, but rather whether the process by which it became law is constitutional. The state constitution says lawmakers cannot combine unrelated subjects into one bill.
Legislative supporters attached the gun language onto a natural resources bill in 2003 to force a full Senate vote.
David Lillehaug, who represents a group of churches, the city of Minneapolis and other nonprofits that challenged the law, says they're happy with the ruling.
The constitutionality of the law was challenged by churches, the City of Minneapolis and other nonprofits who could no longer control who brought guns onto their property. The law had very specific language about how signs had to be lettered to bar guns from indoors, but also stated that nobody could restrict someone from carrying a gun onto property such as parking lots. Most police chiefs and sheriffs in the state also opposed this law.
Where this law ran afoul of the state constitution is the manner in which it was passed. It was tacked onto a Department of Natural Resources bill covering park fees and other outdoor activities. The Minnesota Constitution prohibits unrelated matters from being combined into single bills. The Appeals Court upheld the lower court ruling stating that the conceal and carry amendment was an unrelated matter to the DNR bill and therefore improperly passed.