Democratic lawmakers are close to a deal on two major policies regulating guns, including a “red flag” measure that would allow a judge to order firearms taken from someone who is a risk to themselves or others.
Sen. Ron Latz, DFL-St. Louis Park, said Wednesday that Democrats will unveil an updated version of the red flag proposal for a committee negotiating public safety policy between the House and Senate to consider. And DFL legislators will also release modified legislation that would extend background checks to private transfers.
Both were priorities of DFL leaders including Gov. Tim Walz, and Democrats hold narrow majorities in the House and Senate. Republicans appear united in opposition, so all DFL senators would need to support the measures. It’s been unclear for months if the party has enough votes.
If the conference committee approves the gun measures as part of a larger package of public safety spending and policy, that omnibus bill would still need a vote in both chambers. But approval by a conference committee would still be a major development because the DFL is unlikely to advance an omnibus bill for a vote in the House or Senate if it doesn’t have enough support.
One senator who had concerns about the red flag policy, Sen. Judy Seeberger, DFL-Afton, helped write the revised policies. She said on Wednesday that earlier versions of the red flag proposal “did not adequately take into consideration the rights of the law-abiding gun owners.”
Seeberger also said the recent killings of law enforcement officers in Minnesota and Wisconsin, along with conversations with gun owners, had influenced her thinking on potential firearm restrictions.
“Considering the deaths of law enforcement that we’ve had in the past couple of months including the one recently from St. Croix County — I grew up in St. Croix County, I’m a Hudson girl — so these start to feel a little bit personal. And so I think what we’re doing right now is not working. I’d like to see something, as would everybody else, to try to get at gun violence that is ruining so many lives.”
Some police organizations have supported the red flag policy, which is also known as an extreme risk protection order. They generally allow a judge to determine if someone is at risk of suicide or a threat to others, and order firearms seized. It’s a policy that has become more prevalent across the country in recent years, including in some more conservative states like Florida.
Gun rights groups had objected to several aspects of a potential red flag law. But they have perhaps most fiercely opposed one part of the legislation that allows someone to have a gun taken away from them for a short time after an “ex parte” hearing. In those cases, the subject of an extreme risk order would not give input on the temporary decision. That person could later contest a longer extreme risk order.
The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, and Republican legislators, said the policy amounted to a violation of due process. Democrats say it’s a key portion of the bill.
Latz told MinnPost in April that he wouldn’t support a version of a red flag law without an ex-parte “emergency” policy. “Without the ex-parte part of it, you don’t have the ability on an emergency basis to separate someone who’s in the middle of a crisis of some sort from the guns that are already in their possession,” Latz said. “Without that path it’s just not worth it.”
Latz said on Wednesday the potential compromise bill keeps that provision. “The changes are comparatively minor,” he said. “That’s a core feature of it.”
If the conference committee adopts the legislation, sending it to the House and Senate for a vote, it would be a major step forward for DFL efforts on gun policy. “It will be the first time that these bills have gotten anywhere close to this far in the Legislature,” Latz said.
0 Commentaires