![Why I Am Suing The Governor of Virginia, iStock-1055138108](https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Court-Justice-Lawsuit-2nd-Amendment-iStock-1055138108-600x400.jpg)
A Minnesota law restricting carry permits to people over age 21 was declared unconstitutional Friday by a federal judge who cited language in the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling as a key factor in her decision.
U.S. District Judge Katherine Menendez issued her 50-page decision in a case known as Worth v. Harrington. It was a victory for gun rights groups including the Second Amendment Foundation, and especially for young adults who have been targeted by gun prohibition groups and anti-gun politicians focused on limiting their Second Amendment rights.
SAF was joined in the lawsuit by the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, Firearms Policy Coalition and three young adults, Austin Dye, Axel Anderson and Kristin Worth, the latter for whom the case is named. They are represented by attorneys Blair W. Nelson of Bemidji, Minn., and David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson and William V. Bergstrom at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C.
In a prepared statement, SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb said, “Judge Menendez’s ruling is a huge victory for young adults and their right to keep and bear arms.
“Furthermore,” he observed, “her decision underscores the importance of last year’s Supreme Court ruling in the Bruen case, which rightfully did away with the so-called ‘balancing test’ that invariably weighed in favor of government interests over individual rights. Judge Menendez has firmly established that young adults are entitled to all the rights protected by the Constitution.”
Ironically, the ruling came just one day after former Arizona Congresswoman-turned-gun-control-advocate Gabrielle “Gabby” Giffords was in Minnesota supporting Gov. Tim Walz to advocate for more gun control, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The newspaper described her audience as “gun safety advocates,” which translates to gun control proponents. Minnesota lawmakers have been pushing a package of gun control bills.
Many in the Second Amendment movement believe the Bruen ruling’s full impact on restrictive gun control laws may not be realized for some time. It has opened the door to challenging gun laws across the country, and also provided some momentum by SAF and others to go back and review previous disappointing court rulings.
Early in her opinion, Judge Menendez observes, “(T)he Court concludes that the text of the Second Amendment includes within the right to keep and bear arms 18-to-20-year-olds, and therefore, the Second Amendment ‘presumptively guarantees [Plaintiffs’] right to ‘bear’ arms in public for self-defense.’”
Defendants in the case were John Harrington, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety; Mille Lacs County Sheriff Don Lorge, Douglas County Sheriff Troy Wolbersen, and Washington County Sheriff Dan Starry, in their official capacities.
“Because the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the Plaintiffs’ proposed course of conduct and Defendants have not met their burden under the historical prong of Bruen’s test, Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on their Second Amendment claim,” Judge Menendez wrote.
However, in her text, the judge does not appear to be wholly convinced allowing young adults to carry is a good idea. In one lengthy segment, she notes, “Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Protect Minnesota, similarly link the still-developing nature of 18–20-year-olds’ brains to increased impulsivity and a prediction that greater access to firearms among young adults leads to disproportionate rates of violent crimes involving firearms and suicides.
“Indeed,” she continues. “Minnesota enacted the age requirement in 2003 for reasons that align with these very concerns, with the Legislature balancing safety interests against its understanding of the right to keep and bear arms…
“If the Court were permitted to consider the value of these goals and how well Minnesota’s age requirement fits the ends to be achieved,” Menendez adds a few lines later, “the outcome here would likely be different. But whatever the evidence may reveal about the wisdom behind enacting a 21-year-old requirement for publicly carrying a handgun, such analysis belongs to a regime of means-end scrutiny scuttled by Bruen. Under Bruen, the balancing of interests in public safety and the right to keep and bear arms has already been ‘struck by the traditions of the American people.’
“Second Amendment jurisprudence now focuses a lens entirely on the choices made in a very different time, by a very different American people,” Menendez writes. “Given the relative dearth of firearms regulation from the most relevant period where that lens is aimed, the endeavor of applying Bruen seems likely to lead, generally, to more guns in the hands of more people, not just young adults. Some Minnesotans are surely fine with that result. Others may wonder what public safety measures are left to be achieved through the political process where guns are concerned. But Bruen makes clear that today’s policy considerations play no role in an analytical framework that begins and ends more than two hundred years ago.”
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, a practicing attorney with experience in firearms litigation, put things into perspective.
“Today’s decision confirms what we already knew to be true, that 18-20 year-olds possess the same right to bear arms for self-defense as those over the age of 21,” Kraut said. “We are pleased that the court has enjoined the state of Minnesota from infringing on the rights of young adults. SAF will continue to work in the courts to vindicate the rights of all Americans.”
About Dave Workman
Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.
Who would have thought that,news flash all gun control laws are un Constitutional each and every one of them.
I am glad to see barriers to self defense for 18-20 year Olds coming down at long last!
Yeah, as if they were to perform in military service brandishing Nerf Guns.
That bit of logic seems to frequently escape them, somehow.
If the people, as young as 12 years are mature enough to give informed consent to having their bodies irreversibly, chemically and/or surgically altered, surely they are mature enough for many other things. Such as, keeping and bearing arms, consenting to sex, operating a motor vehicle purchase and use of alcohol and tobacco, etc., etc.!
Not in Florida, though. Our state RINOs (DeSantis included) have done nothing but restrict rights for the last 20 years. This current as yet unsigned, law is a big nothing burger they are trying to pass off as a steak.
DeSantis needs to go all in at this point.
100% for the second amendment. No more bullshit from him. Stop riding the fence and start leading Americans.
Endorse trump for 2024 and it will guarantee you eight years in the White House after that.
Just don’t turn into a little bitch after you get the White House.
Yeah, nothing says you’re going all in for the 2A like supporting someone who advocates for and enacts infringement.
Sounds like she (the judge) was whining about not being able to violate the 2nd using interest balancing as an excuse, but at least she did the right thing and put a ki-bosh on that unconstitutional rule. It all boils down to preferring dangerous freedom, and loyalty to the Constitution. We the People will not accept any more “in the interest of public safety, government, greater good bs” excuses to infringe on our rights.
I think you hit the nail on the head. She didn’t want to make that ruling. She’s bound by the constitution and she knows it.
It’s about goddamn time.
I get tired of the rot they frequently trot out about the “not fully developed brains at 18-20”, or “brain not fully developed until 25” and using it as an excuse to deny rights to a younger age group. We all developed and acquire wisdom as we age. I had more wisdom at 50 than I did at 35. More at 65 than AR 50. Does this mean we should all be confined to a rubber room, with no metal utensils or sharp objects in reach until we hit 75?
Permits always give liberal paranoids fits. Making the petrified liberal complain of an “armed camp” effect. And that permits transform society into “the wild wild west”.
I’m still waiting for that, “Wild, Wild West” analogy to come about from decisions and statements made over 45 years ago.
Honoring those on the front lines… One of these days it would be an extremely huge and much needed shot in the arm for the 2A community in this nation to host an event to honor all of those plaintiffs, lawyers and their staff involved in the many 2A cases across the country that are standing their grounds in the judicial trenches of this country. Perhaps such an event would awaken the yet sleeping amongst us to put on their Big Boy Pants and join in?
Another excellent piece, Mr. Workman. Still to this day it stymies the common mind as to how these states can rationalize this 18-20 year old age group at the same time these very young men and women are marching off to war to defend this nation? Sadly most affected by these archaic laws were being born and coming of age during the last 20 years of war, being raised and supposedly educated to understand that they will at the age of 18 become an adult and enjoin the rights and duties of the defense of ones self, family, state and… Read more »
It would be nice to see a judge honor their oath by ruling all arms laws unconstitutional.
God willing it’s coming and coming soon!
Has it been appealed yet?
“I pity the fool”. That appeals it. SCOTUS will surely make an example of them.