
On January 7, 2025, two interstate commercial truck drivers filed a complaint in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota. The lawsuit contends Minnesota, and in particular, the Commissioner for the Department of Public Safety, is infringing on the exercise of their Second Amendment rights by not recognizing their right to bear arms across state lines.
Here is the introduction of their complaint:
- This is a constitutional challenge to Minnesota’s refusal to recognize firearm permits lawfully issued by other States. Minnesota criminalizes carrying a firearm without a Minnesota permit or a recognized out-of-state firearm permit. Every year, the Commissioner for Minnesota’s Department of Public Safety decides which out-of-state firearm permits Minnesota will and will not recognize. The recognition of out-of-state firearm permits is at the Commissioner’s sole discretion and is not based on objective standards.
- Currently, Minnesota only recognizes the out-of-state firearm permits from 20 states, and refuses to recognize the out-of-state permits from 29 states, including Texas, Florida, and Georgia. In other words, millions of law-abiding citizens who lawfully bear arms in their home states cannot do so while visiting the State of Minnesota—unless they obtain a separate Minnesota firearm permit.
- Minnesota’s failure to honor lawfully issued firearm permits from all States places an unreasonable burden on Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment right to bear arms. Individuals do not lose their constitutional rights simply by crossing into another state. In fact, there is no other constitutional right that Minnesota requires a visiting individual to first obtain permission before they may exercise a fundamental right.
- The Minnesota firearm permit law and the Commissioner’s arbitrary refusal to recognize the lawfully issued firearm permits from all other States violates the Second Amendment. Defendant will continue to infringe on millions of Americans’ right to bear arms in Minnesota unless, and until, a court declares the law and actions unconstitutional and enjoins Defendant’s enforcement.
There are several cases in the courts challenging restrictions that place unreasonable burdens on the exercise of rights protected by the Second Amendment while traveling across state lines. Two are combined criminal cases in the State of Massachusetts Supreme Court of Judicial Appeal. The other two cases are being processed in California. Any of these cases could make precedent favorable to exercising Second Amendment rights across state lines, if only in one state or one federal circuit. Reciprocity across state lines is highly variable and rapidly changing.
These cases could become moot if Senate Bill S65, National Reciprocity, is enacted. The bill was recently introduced into the Senate, with a companion bill introduced in the House of Representatives. 29 states have permitless or Constitutional carry. Twenty-one states have “shall issue” permit laws, even if several of them, Hawaii, California, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, and New Jersey, are actively resisting the implementation of shall issue in the courts and in their legislatures.
Most senators are from states with large numbers of people who can legally carry concealed weapons. Those senators may see little advantage in preventing visitors to their state from exercising rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the United States Constitution. President Donald Trump’s re-election means that if the national reciprocity bill passes the Senate and House, the President will sign it.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
I have long advocated for anyone, and truckers in particular, being allowed to carry, nationwide. Their jobs take them into plenty of questionable environments, often in close proximity to questionable personages. Government and corporate regulations already give these guys enough unnecessary stuff to worry about. Their lives and safety because of miscreants in unfamiliar places should not be another worry for them.
Without the truckers, our sheves would be bare and we would all be in a world of hurt.
When I worked for UPS we were told we couldn’t even have firearms in our personal vehicle. I was a mechanic working in a less than desirable part of town.I always kept my EDC in the car since this is America and we have the Second . Never needed it although I’m sure Big Brown was afraid of someone going postal
National Reciprocity takes care of this.
I hope they are successful. They should be allowed that right.
Having driven my own truck (a PU) across our beautiful country and flown in small aircraft with a pilot who had a plastic license from the FAA in his pocket honored even by Hawaii, New York, New Jersey, and etc., I’ve wondered why driver licenses are recognized, pilot licenses are recognized, but… think of all the other exceptions where yours or my home state licenses are NOT.
Very little in your home did not travel by truck and all of the rest are indirectly dependent. Truck robberies and hijackings are real. Our nation would collapse without the safe and reliable services this industry provides. I only wish they carried less imported goods and delivered fewer empty containers to the coast.
MN Stat 624.714 provides that MN will recognize permits from other states that are substantially similar to MN’s. The problem is that the BCA has consistently interpreting that to deny recognition of all but a handful of states.
Everyone, everywhere, at all times…
friend of mine used to run flats across the country. He knew he could not safely carry a handgun but refused to be unarmed, His solution? VERY unconventional, but he kept his M1 Garand in the cab, and plenty of charged stripper clips. He had carefully researched, and thought it hilarious that a genuine VERY high power deadly “assault weapon” developed specifically for war was legal in every state. He kept it bolt back safety off. Kept a collection of the charged clips stashed here and there, often one in his pocket. Snap that thing i there, watch out or… Read more »
I’m a retired driver after 43 years, I carried a gun in my truck. What people don’t realize that there is a federal law on the books that allow transportation of firearms across state lines, it just has to be empty and in a case, now I’m assuming that the suit is about ccw and all I can say is good luck, I don’t think it’s going no where. Even if a national carry law was passed, did you ever think about the shippers & receivers that will not allow you to be on there property with a gun in… Read more »