Feds file Second Amendment suit against Minnesota over firearm purchase laws

The Justice Department gave state officials notice to negotiate a resolution last week, though Thursday's suit indicates no agreement was made.MINNEAPOLIS (CN) — The Justice Department filed a lawsuit Thursday to challenge Minnesota’s gun purchase requirements and waiting periods, arguing state law enforcement agencies violate the Second Amendment by delaying citizens’ right to acquire firearms for self-defense.In the 13-page suit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, the federal government asks the court to permanently enjoin Minnesota and its two largest cities from enforcing 30-day waiting periods and permit-to-purchase requirements against those without a carry permit.It also requests a declaration that such conduct violates Minnesotans’ Second Amendment rights.“We are committed to protecting Minnesotans’ right to purchase firearms, and we will not tolerate procedures that are wielded in a way that impairs that right,” Minnesota U.S. Attorney Daniel N. Rosen said in a press release.Under Minnesota law, individuals without a permit to carry must navigate a permit-to-purchase and waiting period framework to acquire handguns or “regulated rifles” — including semi-automatic rifles like AR-15s.Prospective buyers must first apply for a permit through their local chief of police or county sheriff, who has up to 30 days to approve or deny the application — which only remains valid for one year, requiring annual reapplications.Minnesotans holding a valid state permit to carry are exempt from these requirements — though the Justice Department emphasizes over 93% of the state’s residents do not possess a carry permit.Citing that percentage, the federal government argues Minnesota statute imposes unnecessary and unconstitutional delays on residents seeking firearms strictly for home defense with no intention or need for public carry.It also notes local processing times among police and sheriff departments frequently stretch beyond the 30-day limit to nearly double that time — especially in Minneapolis and St. Paul — and that state law provides no penalties for delays or adequate remedies for affected applicants.“The Supreme Court held that the home is where the need for defense of self, family and property is most acute. When a person needs to defend their home, they need to defend it now, not 30 to 60 days from now,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division said in a press release.By forcing officers to enforce these supposedly unconstitutional waiting periods and application backlogs, the federal government claims state and municipal authorities are violating a federal statute prohibiting government bodies from engaging in a “pattern or practice” of unconstitutional law enforcement.The Justice Department argues Minnesota’s law falls under the Supreme Court’s analysis in its 2022 decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which established a two-prong test for determining whether firearm regulations pass constitutional scrutiny.The first step in Bruen asks whether the law applies to the people, concerns arms and restricts “keeping or bearing.” If the answer to all three questions is yes — which the government argues it is in this case — then the law is unconstitutional.“Laws which hobble the Second Amendment and corresponding rights are unconstitutional,” the government says in the complaint.Noting it need not venture into the second prong, the government nevertheless argues Minnesota’s law cannot meet that step either, as it requires the law to match a historical tradition in American history.“Defendants will not be able to rebut the presumption of unconstitutionality because they will not be able to show that the state’s waiting period is consistent with the nation’s history and tradition of firearms regulation,” the government says in the complaint.The Justice Department sent Minnesota a notice of suit last week, giving state officials until 5 p.m. on Sept. 23 to indicate they were willing to negotiate a resolution.The settlement terms specified to avoid court, Minnesota would need to immediately cease enforcing the waiting period and permit laws, admit they were unconstitutional and enter a court-enforceable consent decree.Given the filing of Thursday’s suit, it’s likely no agreement was made.The Minnesota suit is part of a broader, nationwide campaign by the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division against mostly blue states and municipal police forces over local gun regulations.Similar federal suits have recently targeted processing backlogs and wait times in Los Angeles County and assault weapon restrictions in states like Maryland, Virginia and Colorado.Neither the Justice Department nor the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office responded to an initial request for comment.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads