I had written a letter to the sheriff giving notice in accordance with state law that I am a permit holder and will be lawfully carrying a pistol in the County Courthouse building. A couple of weeks later, I received a letter via certified mail stating that a judge had issued a court order that regardless of whether a person has a permit, they will be held in contempt should any firearms be carried in any courthouse facilities. It seems to me that since Minnesota is a preemption state, that this court order would be overrulled by state law as long as the required notice is given which I have done.

Has anyone run into this and do you have any suggestions or additional information?

Thanks

Be sure to post the details of your test case. We'll all be on the edge of our seats...

Remember, the judge who issued the court order may be the judge hearing your case.

Let us know how that works out for you.

Previous discussion here:
http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10588

If you want to continue to carry in the courthouse I suggest you find a good gun-friendly civil-rights lawyer and pick a fight with the judge. Depending on your situation you might have a good test-case. If you continue to carry in the courthouse without winning that fight you most likely you will eventually get arrested and become a test-case involuntarily.

Just to clarify, unless you would like to invest a significant amount of time and money and risk testing that particular point of law, I would strongly recommend that you NOT attempt to carry into the courthouse. I don't believe that judges shouldn't be able to do that. I, as a non-lawyer type of person, even think that it might potentially be against the law to do that. I don't want to poke the courts on it and find out the hard way that they're going to say I'm wrong, though.

Other than that, check out the other thread. Good info.

I would recommend NOT doing this, even if you had time, money, lawyers and a "sacrificial lamb" for the test case. The PR the case would generate would cause the rest of us permit holders nothing but harm, IMHO.

You would be better off focusing on gun rights education directed towards other gun owners and the population at large.

Thanks for the comments. Don't plan on becoming a test case. Just currious.

americanoner: Welcome. Glad we can be a resource for you! There are a ton of very knowledgeable people on this forum!

The way our government works is with three co-equal branches. The judiciary expects both the executive and the legislative to obey its rulings and to enforce its orders. It can of course make its own rules for its operations including day to day security. I submit to the group this is nothing to poke a sharp stick at. Particularly since they DO offer armed security. AND if they strike down the law you’re quoting, it would be obeyed by the sheriffs. And the Governor most likely. That wouldn’t serve us well.

Additionally the commentary already offered probably isn’t wrong. I’m suggesting that if there’s an order it’s not right to disobey.

If memory serves I think I was taught this stuff in grade school. Along about the eighth grade.

Regards, Porkie

In Hennepin, yes. Most counties with such an order disarm you AND fail to protect you.

FYI:

I just found that this order was made prior to the 2003/2005 carry law. Interesting... If I we're a lawyer, might be an interesting one. I would bet that the law would supersede the court order, but again, don't want to test this one. I would guess you might have to appeal to the state supreme court if this was ever tested.

And I'm sure you'll be just as compliant when said judges order you to show up at the courthouse and surrender ALL your firearms. After all, 'if there's an ORDER it's not right to disobey'.

Really? All the way out to my car, regardless of where I had to park? Or the whole way home, if I had to take the bus?

Some guy I did some work for (who never paid for my services) tried to sue me in small claims court for taking down his banners after the fact (loss of revenue, blah blah, certain amount, website work) and when it came time to go, he, well lost and I requested security and was walked from the courthouse to my car.

She was nice, pretty AND armed.

Not too bad versus nothing at all...

It is interesting how the judge wins by default and we gun owner’s council our fellow citizens to let him/her win. Judges post such an order knowing everyone will run and hide and no one will dare to argue their authority. And no I am not going to be the test case but maybe americanoner does have the money. If so I wish you luck in brining this pompous judge back to the reality that he serves the people he does not dictate to us. Too bad the ACLU doesn’t really believe in American’s civil liberties as this would be a good case for them to handle in the name of our liberties. We need a real ACLU.