A new ruling from a federal appeals court on Tuesday determined that a Minnesota law that required someone to be 21 years old before they could obtain a handgun permit to use in public for self-defense is unconstitutional.
The ruling comes from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in St. Louis.
Court Case
Gun rights groups including the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Firearms Policy Coalition filed suit in court against the Minnesota permit-to-carry statute, challenging its age restrictions.
The plaintiffs in the case alleged that the enforcement of the age limit violated the Second Amendment rights of 18-20-year-olds under the Constitution.
Judge’s Ruling
This latest ruling from the 8th District upheld a lower judge’s court ruling last year that found in favor of the gun rights groups.
“Importantly, the Second Amendment’s plain text does not have an age limit,” wrote U.S. 8th Circuit Judge Duane Benton in the ruling.
Ruling Reasoning
Benton wrote in the decision that the state had not clearly established why the risk posed by 18 to 20-year-olds justified the restrictions on age set in the law.
“Minnesota has not met its burden to proffer sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption that 18 to 20-year-olds seeking to carry handguns in public for selfdefense are protected by the right to keep and bear arms. The Carry Ban, § 624.714 subd. 2(b)(2), violates the Second Amendment as applied to Minnesota through the Fourteenth Amendment, and, thus, is unconstitutional,” wrote Benton.
What the Second Amendment Says
The Second Amendment of the US Constitution makes it clear that a well-regulated Militia is necessary for the security of a free State.
It also states that it is within the rights of the people of the US to keep and bear arms and that this cannot be infringed.
What the Second Amendment Means
Many people get confused by the wording of the Second Amendment, as it can be somewhat confusing.
The Second Amendment essentially means that all Americans have the right to own and carry firearms to protect themselves against threats and that the government is unable to interfere with this right.
The Bruen Decision
When the court case was presented to US District Judge Katherine Menendez in March 2023, she struck the law down but granted an emergency motion for a stay, as requested by the state of Minnesota.
This is an example of the 2022 Supreme Court case, the Bruen decision, which overturned nationwide gun laws. This decision divided courts and resulted in some confusion as to which restrictions could still remain in place.
What the Bruen Decision Established
The Bruen decision was a historic moment for gun laws across the US and was the most significant gun ruling in the high court for more than a decade.
It included the right for Americans to carry firearms in public for self-defense purposes and establishing a new test for evaluating challenges to gun restrictions. Courts now have to ask themselves whether any imposed restrictions are in keeping with the country’s historic firearm regulations.
Minnesota Law
The law overturned by this decision was passed in Minnesota in 2003. The law raised restrictions to only allow individuals age 21 and over to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.
The federal age limit for this right is 18 years old.
20th Century Laws
In defense of the 2003 law, the state tried to present a 20th-century law precedent that bans firearm carry by “the mentally ill or those with unsound minds.” However, Benton disagreed that just being a certain age meant that one is comparable to being mentally ill.
“Those laws, still in effect, prevent the mentally ill from acquiring firearms. Minnesota may not claim all 18 to 20-year-olds are comparable to the mentally ill. This court declines to read a new category into the list of presumptively lawful statutes,” Benton wrote.
Disappointment in the Decision
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has expressed his disappointment at the ruling and said that the state of Minnesota is still trying to decide how to proceed.
He also made it clear how troubling the ruling is, especially as it came just a few days after a 20-year-old fired shots at former President Donald Trump during a rally in Pennsylvania.
A Need for Safety
Most residents of any area, whether in the US or elsewhere in the world, will agree that their safety is of paramount importance and shouldn’t be compromised.
Many people in the US want an increase in safety, which they believe can only happen by imposing restrictions on guns.
Republican Appointees
Benton wrote the opinion for a panel of three judges that made the ruling in the case that sided with the plaintiffs.
All three judges have been appointed by Republican presidents and determined that recent Supreme Court rulings have expanded gun rights to the point that the Minnesota law can no longer stand.
Republicans, Democrats, and Gun Laws
Republicans and Democrats might differ on many things, but there are some areas of gun laws that people supporting the two parties can relatively agree on.
Both Republicans and Democrats strongly believe that there should be background checks on people purchasing guns, people with mental illnesses should be prevented from purchasing guns, and family members should be able to go to court if they are worried that a gun owner might harm themselves or others.
Differences in Republicans and Democrats
Despite there being very few similarities between Democrats and Republicans, there are a lot of differences in opinion when it comes to gun laws. One of which is Democrats being strongly in favor of banning assault-style weapons, whereas Republicans tend to be strongly against this.
There are also differences when it comes to schools, with Democrats being against teachers and school officials carrying guns in K-12 schools, whereas Republicans are in favor of this. Republicans also tend to believe that the right to own a gun is more important than protecting people from gun violence, whereas Democrats are completely against this.
Supreme Court Ruling
In his ruling, Judge Benton cited a 2022 Supreme Court Case that struck down a New York gun law and established a right for an individual to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.
The opinion in the case, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, asserted that the US Constitution establishes “an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.”
Celebrating the Decision
The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus took to the social media platform X to celebrate their win in the latest court ruling.
“Good morning all, This week we kicked Keith Ellison’s *ss at the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals,” the group wrote. Keith Ellison is the Attorney General for Minnesota and has defended the 2003 law.
Plotting to Sue More
Not content to rest on the laurels of victory, the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus promised that more lawsuits would come in the future to protect the gun rights of Minnesotans.
“We’re already plotting who we should sue next as we work to take down the disarmament regime here in Minnesota – and we’re aiming to put a Pro-2A legislature in the Minnesota House,” wrote the group on X.
Declaring Victory
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) was also in a celebratory mood following the 8th Circuit’s decision, framing the ruling as a win for young adults.
“Today the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s opinion which struck down Minnesota’s ban on carry for young adults as unconstitutional,” said an X post by the group.
Gun Lawsuits in the US
There have been several gun lawsuits across the US in recent years, with those involved either trying to overturn gun laws in various states that have limited the use of guns in an ‘unconstitutional’ move or trying to impose stricter gun regulations.
Another case involved Mexico, which was able to win a $10 billion lawsuit against US gunmakers, as guns being made in the US were ending up in the hands of cartels.
Age Restrictions on Gun Laws
Minnesota isn’t the only state that wants to raise the age limit for people able to purchase firearms, as other states have previously done the same thing, often with the same outcome.
Georgia, Illinois, and Pennsylvania are all examples of states that have tried to impose laws on age groups able to purchase firearms. Still, the Constitution and courts have always remained strong in their stance.
Supreme Court Overhauling the Second Amendment
The situation with gun laws has got to the point where the Supreme Court is planning on completely rewriting the Second Amendment.
However, this isn’t good news for campaigners for gun safety. There is the belief that should this happen, it will be challenging to regulate guns or keep schools and communities safe, especially when it is already pretty hard to do this.
The Proposed 28th Amendment
However, not everyone supports these laws and wants to tackle gun violence. One of these people is Gavin Newsom, Governor of California.
He has proposed a 28th Amendment to the US Constitution that would ban people under 21 from buying firearms, ban assault weapons, and mandate universal background checks. However, with this recent decision in Minnesota, there is doubt over whether this will happen.
Constitutional Rights
The group’s post continued, affirming their commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of young adults.
“It is encouraging that yet another circuit court has correctly concluded that 18-20-year-olds are part of ‘the People’ to which the Second Amendment extends. SAF remains steadfast in its commitment to ensure that young adults are able to fully exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” said the SAF post.
