In May last year, I wrote about how:
…the DFL, in scenes that would embarrass a banana republic, [rammed] through a 1,400 page Omnibus Bill that nobody had read and was blocking any debate on the bill whatsoever.
The bill included everything from increased penalties for straw gun purchases to a hike in the payroll tax required to fund the state’s ever more expensive Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) program.
The bill also included guarantees of minimum rates for Uber and Lyft drivers of $1.28 per mile and 31 cents per minute, overriding the ordinance passed by Minneapolis City Council that started this whole fiasco. In addition, the bill requires the companies to deal with “driver advocacy organizations,” with a description of these organizations so specific that it applies to only one. A spokesman for Uber noted, correctly, that “the coming price increases may hurt riders and drivers alike,” but added that “we will be able to continue to operate across the state under the compromise brokered by the governor.”
Republicans warned that the bill was in violation of House rules, Senate rules, Joint Rules of the Legislature, and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota.” This was a reference to Article IV, section 17, of Minnesota’s constitution, known as the Single Subject and Title Clause, which reads: “No law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title.” Today, a Ramsey County judge ruled that they were right.
The bill also contained a ban on binary triggers, defined as a “device that allows a firearm to shoot one shot on the pull of the trigger and a second shot on the release of the trigger without requiring a subsequent pull of the trigger.” Alpha News reports:
The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, represented by the Upper Midwest Law Center, filed suit in February of this year, saying the binary trigger ban was a “clear violation of the single subject provision of the constitution.”
“The 2024 Omnibus Bill violates the Single Subject and Title Clause, because, at best, it contains many non-germane parts, and at worst, has no identifiable common theme. Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment must be granted, and the only question is which remedy is appropriate: wholesale invalidation of the 2024 Omnibus Bill or severance of the offending portion now before the Court,” Judge [Leonardo] Castro wrote.
He opted to sever the binary trigger ban from the omnibus bill, rather than strike down the entire omnibus bill, out of respect for Minnesota Supreme Court precedent.
“But make no mistake, during the late hours of May 19, 2024, lawmaking did not ‘occur within the framework of the constitution,’” Castro concluded, referencing the disorderly passage of the omnibus bill.
“This Court respectfully suggests that if there has ever been a bill without a common theme and where ‘all bounds of reason and restraint seem to have been abandoned,’ this is it; and if there has ever been a time for the ‘draconian result of invalidating the entire law,’ that time is now.”
This presents a stark prospect: What is to stop someone with standing filing a suit challenging one of the bill’s other provisions, such as the hike in the payroll tax to fund the PFML program or the guaranteed minimum rates for Uber and Lyft drivers? Surely these would be just as vulnerable as the ban on binary triggers and on exactly the same grounds?
The 2024 session ended in such chaos because Sen. Omar Fateh (DFL), who is now running for the mayoralty of Minneapolis, held up the session until the rideshare measure was included. That chaos, arising from Sen. Fateh’s actions, might yet see the work of the 2024 legislative session undone in its entirety. I wrote last year that:
Many Minnesotans will be thanking Anthony Edwards for his stunning performance on the court Sunday. They also owe some thanks to Sen. Fateh for his actions — or inactions — in the legislature on Saturday.
Watch this courtroom.
