Minnesota Gun Rights Groups Challenge St. Paul Ordinance

Legal tussles in Minnesota have stirred up quite a storm, particularly between gun rights advocates and the city of St. Paul. For half a year now, groups like the Minnesota Gun Owners Congress (MNGOC) have been in court over a ban they claim was unlawfully enacted on modern semi-automatic firearms. The controversy began when St. Paul, as the state’s capital, passed an ordinance in November aimed at “assault weapons.” This regulation, interestingly, was designed to take effect only if an existing state law on firearms preemption was repealed.

Gun rights advocates assert that the city’s move not only raises “significant legal uncertainty” but also hampers their “fundamental right to keep and bear arms.” The formal complaint highlights how the St. Paul City Council intentionally created an ordinance, dubbed 25-65, that broadly restricts the ownership, transportation, and sale of various common firearms and related accessories. Notably, it also aims to limit where permit holders can carry firearms.

In an attempt to lock this ordinance in place, the city cleverly included a stipulation making it contingent on the future amendments of state law regarding firearms.

📋 Litigation Update: Caucus v. City of St. Paul (Preemptive)

A quick summary. St. Paul has passed extensive gun control ordinances, including bans on possession of semi-automatic rifles and binary triggers, and restrictions on carry.

They wrote this bill to only go into effect if Congress repeals it… pic.twitter.com/npfkSMiJ8A

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) July 21, 2026

Recently, Minnesota District Judge Leonardo Castro turned down the gun rights group’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. In May, he declined to dismiss the lawsuit, stressing that gun owners are still bound to follow the ordinance, even if its future enforcement remains muddled.

“This court concludes that plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to support the specific issues at hand,” Castro stated when denying St. Paul’s dismissal attempt.

The city’s Democratic Mayor Kaoli Herr has not yet responded to requests for comments regarding this matter. Meanwhile, Rob Doerr, general counsel for MNGOC, mentioned that their legal strategy takes into account experiences from past cases. “We’ve found greater success when cases are steered towards different legal arguments. For instance, we won a case against Tim Walz about the binary trigger ban due to the Legislature’s mishandling,” Doerr explained.

Doerr also highlighted that this case isn’t primarily about the Second Amendment. “Our stance is that Minnesota’s laws take precedence over local gun control measures. The idea is that there should be uniform firearm regulations statewide,” he noted. He went on to point out that since 2010, following Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty’s exit, Democrat appointments have influenced the judiciary significantly.