Was a 1,430-page catchall bill passed in the final minutes of the 2024 Minnesota legislative session so incohesive that it was actually illegal?
The answer, for now, is no.
On Monday, the Minnesota Court of Appeals handed down two decisions regarding whether the 2024 omnibus bill on the “operations and financing of state government” broke the state constitution’s rule that legislation must have a single subject.
In both cases, the appeals court affirmed a district court judge’s ruling, noting that prior state Supreme Court cases declined to invalidate entire pieces of legislation that violated the single subject rule. In responding to specific, separate challenges from the Gun Owners Caucus and UnitedHealth Group, it invalidated one provision while affirming the other.
As a result, Minnesota’s ban on binary triggers is no more, because the courts have ruled it didn’t belong in the omnibus bill. But a ban on for-profit health insurers contracting with state agencies was ruled valid because the judges said it fit within a bill related to the operations and finances of state government.
Related from the MinnPost archives: Are omnibus bills illegal?
Asked if it will appeal the decisions, the state attorney general’s office said Monday it is reviewing the cases and evaluating its options.
The opinions came down less than a week after legislators adjourned for their 2026 session. This year’s Legislature passed no ultra-omnibus measures. From what I have seen so far, each of the omnibus bills passed relates to a single-subject, (however broad) like health care or taxes.
The appeals court ruling on the binary trigger ban concerned the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus suing to invalidate a sliver of the 2024 law. The provision defined the banned binary trigger activator 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 second trigger pull.
A lower court judge sided with the gun ownership lobby that the binary trigger ban was “not germane” to the single subject rule, and so voided the prohibition. But the judge also said it would be overreach to invalidate the entire law, whose title alone is over 200 words.
Related: Gun Owners Caucus challenges binary trigger ban and also larger bill
The governor and state attorney general’s offices appealed, but the gun group appealed as well, in hopes of nullifying the entire statute.
The Walz administration argued that “it is nearly impossible for courts to enforce the single subject clause because the term ‘subject’ is inherently ambiguous,” acknowledged presiding appeals judge Michelle Larkin in the written ruling.
Also, the state asserted that, like mosquitoes and muscle cramps, omnibus bills are part of life. (I will note for context here that even if omnibus bills have become the Legislature’s practice, there are still critics who say it doesn’t have to be that way. House Speaker – and candidate for governor – Lisa Demuth made a point of saying the House was only passing single-subject bills this session, though eventually marrying the House and Senate’s work required omnibus legislation.)
Related: Why the Minnesota Legislature loves/hates the massive omnibus bill
Larkin agreed with Walz’s lawyers that prior state Supreme Court rulings on single-subject clauses did not strike down omnibus legislation, and so the high court must decide if to break from precedent.
But the judge also shared the district court’s concern 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,” referring to the binary trigger ban.
In a statement Monday, the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus declared victory on the ruling’s effect for gun owners and declined to address whether it will appeal to the Supreme Court.
“With today’s decision, Minnesota’s binary trigger ban is dead,” the statement read.
The governor’s office expressed their disappointment in the Legislature for not re-passing the ban in a new bill during the just completed legislative session.
“Minnesota passed a ban on deadly binary triggers once and we’ll do it again,” Walz said in an emailed statement. “I’m disappointed the House failed to reestablish this commonsense law, but I’m confident Minnesotans will continue to make their voices heard and demand it goes back in effect.”
In the appeals court’s UnitedHealth Group ruling on Tuesday, UnitedHeath had hoped to invalidate the part of the 2024 omnibus bill that stopped for-profit health insurers from contracting with the state. Larkin agreed with the district court ruling that setting contract restrictions on state agencies does fit the single subject of government finance and operations.
“The state argues that ‘many’ of the law’s provisions relate to the ‘operation and financing of state government,’” Larkin wrote, which, per Supreme Court precedent, “seems to be good enough.”
A message left with UnitedHealth on Monday was not immediately returned.
Related
