jfh
Member.
here's the local rag (StarTribune) link: http://www.startribune.com/west/story/1537432.html
And here's the text:
emphasis added by poster.
Jim H.
And here's the text:
The state law allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns with the proper permit places an undue burden on churches and infringes on their property rights, former U.S. Attorney David Lillehaug argued Thursday before a three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals.
The state is appealing a Hennepin County District Court ruling striking down parts of the law. The 2005 law requires the state to issue handgun permits to citizens who pass background checks and take the required safety course.
Assistant Attorney General Pete Marker argued for upholding the law. "There is no religious practice that is rendered unlawful by the personal protection law," he said.
Lillehaug of the Minneapolis law firm Fredrickson & Byron argued the case on behalf of Edina Community Lutheran Church and Unity Church of St. Paul.
Judges Terri Stoneburner, Jill Flaskamp Holbrooks and David Minge gave no indication of when they would rule on the issue.
Lillehaug said the court must answer two questions: whether the government may force religious institutions to have guns on their religious property and whether government may carve out exceptions to the law allowing handguns.
Lillehaug said the law violates the state and federal constitutions as well as federal law.
Stoneburner seemed skeptical of his arguments about churches bearing an undue burden. She said, "An inconvenience, maybe. But a burden?"
Minge asked Lillehaug whether churches' ability to restrict those with handguns isn't the same with the law as it is without it.
Lillehaug said it isn't the same because, under the law, churches must put up detailed signs and also speak with some telling them to leave. "It's a two-part process," he said.
Without the law, he said, church officials could just call the sheriff if someone carried a gun onto the religious premises.
Of particular concern, he said, is the requirement that the churches post "exquisitely" detailed secular signs at every entrance. He argued that the original goal of the law with respect to posting was to make it so onerous that no one would post a sign barring guns.
Marker said the law is simply requiring uniformity in public places. The law balances religious institutions' rights to practice their faiths free of undue burdens with the parallel right of individuals to possess firearms, Marker said.
The state is appealing a Hennepin County District Court ruling striking down parts of the law. The 2005 law requires the state to issue handgun permits to citizens who pass background checks and take the required safety course.
Assistant Attorney General Pete Marker argued for upholding the law. "There is no religious practice that is rendered unlawful by the personal protection law," he said.
Lillehaug of the Minneapolis law firm Fredrickson & Byron argued the case on behalf of Edina Community Lutheran Church and Unity Church of St. Paul.
Judges Terri Stoneburner, Jill Flaskamp Holbrooks and David Minge gave no indication of when they would rule on the issue.
Lillehaug said the court must answer two questions: whether the government may force religious institutions to have guns on their religious property and whether government may carve out exceptions to the law allowing handguns.
Lillehaug said the law violates the state and federal constitutions as well as federal law.
Stoneburner seemed skeptical of his arguments about churches bearing an undue burden. She said, "An inconvenience, maybe. But a burden?"
Minge asked Lillehaug whether churches' ability to restrict those with handguns isn't the same with the law as it is without it.
Lillehaug said it isn't the same because, under the law, churches must put up detailed signs and also speak with some telling them to leave. "It's a two-part process," he said.
Without the law, he said, church officials could just call the sheriff if someone carried a gun onto the religious premises.
Of particular concern, he said, is the requirement that the churches post "exquisitely" detailed secular signs at every entrance. He argued that the original goal of the law with respect to posting was to make it so onerous that no one would post a sign barring guns.
Marker said the law is simply requiring uniformity in public places. The law balances religious institutions' rights to practice their faiths free of undue burdens with the parallel right of individuals to possess firearms, Marker said.
emphasis added by poster.
Jim H.