Eighth Circuit presses challenge to Minnesota gun permit law

ST. PAUL, Minn. (CN) — A long-haul truck driver told an Eighth Circuit panel Wednesday that Minnesota’s refusal to recognize certain out-of-state firearm permits violates the Second Amendment.

Jeffrey Johnson Sr. — who holds firearm permits in Georgia and Florida — claims Minnesota’s failure to honor lawfully issued permits from all states places an unreasonable burden on the right to bear arms, arguing “individuals do not lose their constitutional rights simply by crossing into another state.”

The three-judge appellate panel didn’t seem to buy the unreasonable burden argument, largely questioning whether anything was concretely wrong with Minnesota’s permit laws.

“If Minnesota can require all of its residents to get a permit, why would it violate the Second Amendment by requiring others to?” U.S. Circuit Judge Steven Grasz, a Donald Trump appointee, asked.

U.S. Circuit Judge Ralph Erickson agreed, piling on to the questioning against Johnson’s attorney, Ryan Morrison.

“Is it your position that, having conceded that the Minnesota permitting process is appropriate for Minnesota residents … that Minnesota must enact a statute that allows reciprocity, or else they’re in violation of the Second Amendment?” Erickson asked. “Do you have a case that says that anywhere in the world?”

The George W. Bush appointee continued with his concern about Morrison’s argument, finding it absurd that those outside of Minnesota shouldn’t be held to the same standard as residents.

“So you have greater rights as a nonresident than as a resident?” Erickson asked. “It just says, if you want to go into Minnesota, you just got to follow the Minnesota permitting process.”

Morrison countered by saying Minnesota can absolutely require residents to obtain a permit, but that lawful, permit-holding individuals from other states shouldn’t have to get another permit just to carry in Minnesota.

“An individual can only be disarmed if that person has been proven to be a danger to the public,” Morrison said. “The people with out-of-state unrecognized firearm licenses have already proven to be law-abiding citizens.”

The statute in question grants reciprocity to states that have firearm license laws “similar” to Minnesota’s and requires those who do not have a valid permit to apply for one — a process the state claims Johnson could go through but chooses not to.

Minnesota said Johnson is asking the state to forgo its own permitting requirements and accept the permit requirement of any and every other state — eliminating the need, or use, for firearm permits altogether.

“What happens when one of those states dramatically changes or lessens the requirement for getting their permits?” Minnesota’s attorney, Madeleine Demeules, asked, pointing to the potential impacts a ruling in favor of Johnson could have.

Johnson is a professional full-time, long-haul truck driver who travels throughout the 48 contiguous states at least 300 days a year, he says in his initial complaint.

When traveling through Minnesota, Johnson said he refrains from carrying a firearm in public, instead stowing it away in his truck — which he says increases the risk he will be subject to violent crimes that are already statistically high among truck drivers.

Johnson said it’s unreasonable to expect him and others to carry around a binder of firearm permits from every state with differing regulations when his job requires him to travel across the country.

“Under Minnesota reciprocity law, everyone without a recognized permit must remove their weapon and place it in a container once they enter the state. … There is no judicial finding that these people are a danger to the public,” Morrison said. “[Johnson’s] Second Amendment rights are being treated like a second-class right.”

The judges honed in on this on Wednesday, asking Demeules if Minnesota placed an unreasonable burden on out-of-state individuals who seek to obtain a permit in the state. But Demeules said that’s not Minnesota’s job to improve.

“The Second Amendment does not require Minnesota to make it easier for out-of-state residents to get a firearm license than Minnesotans,” she said.

The Minnesota Department of Public Safety annually reviews laws from other states governing the issuance of permits to carry weapons and has expanded the valid permit list to include 33 states.

That list was significantly expanded following a 2023 ruling in a separate case and a later affirmation by the Eighth Circuit, which found age restriction in Minnesota’s permit-to-carry statute to be unconstitutional — a decision Johnson argues strengthens his argument.

Minnesota isn’t alone and joins many other states in honoring only a select number of out-of-state permits — each with differing numbers of recognized states.

Demeules pointed this out to the appellate panel Wednesday, arguing that Minnesota’s guidelines are much less restrictive than some other states, like California, that restrict all out-of-state permit holders from carrying firearms.

Johnson argues this to be entirely unconstitutional, claiming the statute categorically disarms law-abiding visitors from the 15 states on the not-valid list — and that Minnesota has not proven the law is consistent with history.

The lower court previously sided with Minnesota, finding that, while Johnson had standing, the law is consistent with America’s long-existing firearm regulation — and Johnson could just acquire a license from Minnesota or a recognized state to solve the problem.

Challenges to gun reciprocity laws aren’t new. The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which was introduced in the House in January, aims to allow residents of constitutional carry states to freely travel with their firearms and would effectively create nationwide permitless carry for people whose home states have such laws.

If passed, it will face a steep challenge in the Senate.

U.S. Circuit Judge Bobby Shepherd, a George W. Bush appointee, rounded out the Eighth Circuit panel.