What are Minnesota laws on carrying firearms at protests and how have courts interpreted them?
Executive summary
Minnesota law allows licensed individuals to carry handguns in public, concealed or not, and contains no state statute barring permit-holders from bringing firearms to protests or rallies [1] [2]. Courts and legal commentators have interpreted recent federal and state practice—and Supreme Court precedent—to mean blanket bans on otherwise-lawful public carry at demonstrations are unlikely to survive Second Amendment scrutiny, though specific circumstances can create criminal or civil liability [3] [4].
1. What the statute actually says: permits, public carry, and protests
Minnesota’s Personal Protection Act and subsequent practice require a Permit to Carry (PTC) for public carry of handguns and allow permit-holders to carry loaded firearms in public, whether concealed or not, and state law does not single out protests or rallies as locations where a lawful permit evaporates [2] [1]. Multiple state reporting outlets and fact-checkers have confirmed there is no state statute that expressly prohibits having a legally carried gun while attending a demonstration in Minnesota [1] [5] [6].
2. How courts and constitutional law frame the question
Legal experts point to a robust post-2022 Supreme Court current that protects public carry as an element of the individual Second Amendment right, and scholars say laws that would categorically ban otherwise-lawful firearms at protests are “quite likely” to be struck down under that framework [3]. The reporting cites court records and recent jurisprudential trends suggesting courts scrutinize place-based restrictions; commentators at Cato and academic law faculties emphasize the difficulty governments face in defending blanket bans on carrying otherwise-lawful firearms at public assemblies [3] [4].
3. Federal officials’ claims and the factual dispute
Top federal officials publicly stated that firearms cannot be brought to protests, and the Department of Homeland Security has advanced positions in court records arguing that carrying a firearm to a demonstration is unlawful—claims that conflict with Minnesota statutory practice and have been challenged by local gun-rights groups and some legal scholars [7] [8]. Fact-checking outlets and Minnesota advocacy groups pushed back, noting that federal statements—repeated by FBI Director Kash Patel and others—do not align with Minnesota law and that the state does not bar permit-holders from carrying to protests [1] [5] [9].
4. How stakeholders are interpreting and litigating the gap
Gun-rights organizations, including the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus and national groups cited in multiple reports, insist every peaceable Minnesotan may be armed while attending protests and that those rights do not disappear at demonstrations; civil‑liberties and some academic voices counter that while lawful carriage is permitted, being armed at volatile events can increase legal risk and friction with law enforcement [10] [6] [9]. At the same time, the federal government’s litigation posture—asserting a differently framed standard in court documents—raises a procedural and interpretive clash that may be resolved in federal court if prosecutions or civil suits proceed [7] [8].
5. Practical limits, evidentiary context, and unresolved questions
Reporting repeatedly cautions that the legal right to carry at a protest does not immunize specific conduct—brandishing, threats, interference with law enforcement, or violating other applicable statutes can still produce criminal liability—and that courts will weigh context, intent, and conduct even where a permit exists [3] [9]. The available sources document disagreement between federal officials and Minnesota actors but do not provide a final judicial ruling definitively resolving whether federal claims about “unlawful” carry at protests are legally correct in Minnesota; that question remains dependent on litigation outcomes and particular facts not contained in the reviewed reporting [7] [1].