Churches in Minnesota win another round on gun ban
Court of Appeals: Churches can lawfully ban guns from their premises. Court agrees to exempt religious institutions from the 2005 law.
By ROCHELLE OLSON, Star Tribune
Last update: February 5, 2008 - 1:34 PM
In another victory for churches wanting to ban guns from their premises, the state Court of Appeals issued a 32-page decision Tuesday agreeing with the district court that religious institutions are exempt from the so-called Minnesota Citizens' Personal Protection Act of 2005.
Churches also are not required to post the statutorily proscribed signs that say that the building operator "BANS GUNS ON THESE PREMISES."
"The uncontroverted affidavits before us establish that the sign provision does compel churches that wish to exclude firearms to act in a manner that is inconsistent with their religious beliefs by requiring that they place specific, conspicuous signs at every entrance to the church," said the opinion written by Judge David Minge and signed by Judges Jill Flaskamp Halbrooks and Terri Stoneburner.
The decision means the Edina Community Lutheran Church can continue to legally bar guns with signs saying "Blessed are the peacemakers. Firearms are prohibited in this place of sanctuary." Other churches may choose their own wording.
The decision also means that parking lots, day-care centers and other charitable, educational and nonprofit facilities owned by churches may ban firearms.
Unity Church of St. Paul also sued, arguing that compliance with the sign requirement "would be inconsistent with its mission to provide a safe sanctuary and welcoming place of worship."
Pastor Erik Strand of Edina Community Lutheran Church said he was pleased with the decision, as did Marshall Tanick, the lawyer for Unity Church. "We're especially thankful that the court recognized and protected our congregation's witness to peacemaking and nonviolence in all relationships," Strand said in a written statement.
He noted that all the provisions challenged by the churches - notification, parking lots and tenant spaces - were found to be unconstitutional as applied to religious institutions. David Lillehaug of the Fredrikson & Byron law firm argued the case for the Edina church.
Tanick said the decision was interesting because the Court of Appeals ruled "on the broadest possible grounds," couching the ruling in the state constitution's freedom of conscience clause, which the court deems more expansive than the federal Constitution's First Amendment. "It underscores the importance of freedom of religion in Minnesota," he said.
The opinion cited the explanation of the Edina church's leaders who said entrances to Lutheran churches are reserved for "important religious messages that can be traced to Martin Luther's act of nailing the 95 Theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany."
A spokesman for Attorney General Lori Swanson did not immediately return a call so it was unclear whether the state would appeal.
The ruling affirmed a decision from November 2006 when Hennepin County District Court Judge William Howard issued a permanent injunction in favor of the churches. Because of temporary injunctions, the churches were never bound by the law's restrictions. The law initially passed in 2003 and was modified in 2005.
None of the rulings effect most of the law's provisions, including the requirement that sheriffs issue permits to carry handguns to applicants 21 and older who receive prescribed training and pass a background check.
Rochelle Olson • 612-673-1747
http://www.startribune.com/local/15314881.html
Argh.
The opinion can be found here:
http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/coa/current/opa070131-0205.pdf
While the church will still need to communicate, they can do so as they choose:
The decision means the Edina Community Lutheran Church can go on legally barring guns with signs saying, "Blessed are the peacemakers. Firearms are prohibited in this place of sanctuary" rather than the language set down by law. Other churches may choose their own wording.
And banning firearms in parking lots is another important step in attacking the Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act.
My prediction is that this is likely to go up to the MN Supreme Court.
Last edited by a moderator:
