WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HF 1117

Local units of government prohibited from disarming peace officers who are in good standing.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Matt Bliss and 3 co-sponsors

Local units of government in Minnesota may not disarm peace officers who are in good standing, protecting their access to firearms and related equipment.

Introduction and first reading, referred to Public Safety Finance and Policy
#firearmsanddangerousweapons #governmentaloperations-local #policeandpeaceofficers
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HF 1117

Summary of HF 1117 (2025-2026) — Minnesota

Title

Local units of government prohibited from disarming peace officers who are in good standing.

Purpose and intent

The bill seeks to prohibit local units of government in Minnesota from disarming peace officers who are in good standing. In practical terms, it would prevent municipalities, counties, or other local authorities from removing, restricting, or otherwise taking away the weapons of peace officers who meet established criteria for “good standing.” The underlying aim appears to be to ensure that officers who are authorized and performing their duties without disqualifying conduct retain their arsenals or access to firearms necessary for their role.

Key provisions and changes (as implied by title and typical structure)

  • Policy prohibition: Local units of government may not disarm peace officers who are in good standing. This would apply to the act of taking away firearms, ammunition, or any other equipment that constitutes “disarming.”
  • Definition of “peace officer” and “good standing”: The bill would define who qualifies as a peace officer and what constitutes “good standing.” This likely involves factors such as current employment status, absence of disqualifying conduct, and compliance with departmental standards (e.g., training, certifications, performance records). The precise definitions would be important for determining eligibility.
  • Scope of entities covered: The bill would specify which local governments are covered (cities, counties, and possibly joint powers boards or special districts) and whether state agencies are excluded.
  • Enforcement and penalties: Provisions would outline who enforces the rule and what penalties or remedies exist if a local unit disarms an officer in good standing (e.g., legal action, administrative consequences).
  • Effective date and transition: The bill would establish an effective date and any transition period for local entities to adjust policies and practices.

Who would be affected

  • Peace officers in Minnesota who are in good standing and employed by local units of government. Their access to or possession of firearms and related equipment would be protected under the bill.
  • Local units of government (cities, counties, and possibly other local authorities) responsible for policy decisions on arming and disarming officers. They would be restricted from disarming officers who meet the “good standing” criteria.
  • Law enforcement agencies and departments that manage armament policies and officer qualifications would need to align procedures with the new prohibition.

Procedural/timeline aspects

  • Introduction and first reading: February 19, 2025, with referral to Public Safety Finance and Policy.
  • Next steps (typical): Committee hearings, potential amendments, and votes in the relevant committee(s), followed by floor action in the Minnesota House of Representatives if advanced. The bill would then proceed through the Senate (if applicable) and to the governor for signature or veto, depending on the legislative process for the 2025-2026 session.

Notes

  • As of the available information, specific definitions, exact language, and detailed provisions (e.g., precise criteria for “good standing,” definitions of “disarming,” and enforcement mechanisms) are not provided. Reading the bill text would be necessary to confirm these elements and any nuanced exceptions or transitional rules.

If you’d like, I can incorporate the exact statutory definitions and draft language once the full bill text is available, and provide a more granular section-by-section analysis.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.