Judge: State Gun Law Unconstitutional - Minnesota
Posted by: Admin on Wednesday, July 14, 2004 - 07:37 AM |
 |
A Minnesota District Court Judge has ruled that the state's Conceal and Carry gun law is unconstitutional — because of a technicality in the way the law was passed.
A lawsuit brought by several churches, and joined by the city of Minneapolis, argued that the law was an "impermissible taking of private property," violates the Due Process clause of the state and U.S. Constitutions and the Freedom of Religion of the state and U.S. Constitutions. It further argued that the way the law was passed — as part of a larger, and unrelated, Department of Natural Resources bill — was unconstitutional.
It was that last argument that John T. Finley ruled on Tuesday. Finley cited rules from the state constitution that require all laws to deal with one topic — and for that topic to be made clear in the title of the bill. The gun law was included in a bill entitled "Bill for an Act Relating to Natural Resources." “This law is unconstitutional because it clearly violates not only the intent, but also the clear meaning of… the Minnesota Constitution,” Finley wrote in his opinion. “By attaching this… amendment to a totally unrelated, non-controversial bill without providing notice to the general public is a direct violation of the state constitution.” Finley did not rule formally on the other constitutional issues raised — freedom of religion, due process and "illegal taking without just compensation" — but shared his opinions "to provide guidance to the Appellate Courts." Freedom of ReligionThe plaintiff's argued that a portion of the law preventing churches from banning guns in their parking lots was an unconstitutional breach of religious freedom. "There is no question that the Act infringes upon those beliefs as it relates to the use of their properties, especially parking lots," the judge wrote. "The court cannot find any plausible reason why an employer (whether public or private) may not restrict one from carrying a weapon on their own parking lot." Illegal TakingIn regards to the claim that the law constituted an "illegal taking without just compensation," the Finley sided with the plaintiff's. He said the law put the state in the position of determining whom a church, or other entity, could ban from its property. Due ProcessThe judge declined to comment on the Due Process argument, except to say that it does not have to rule because the law had already determined the law was "unconstitutional for other reasons." Minnesota Attorney General Michael Hatch says he will appeal today's ruling. Hatch says he believes the concealed-carry permits obtained since the law was passed are still valid. http://www.kare11.com/news/news-article.asp?NEWS_ID=66563
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
