Ramsey County trains 150 people on new 'red flag' law and ramps up case review

The Ramsey County Prosecutor’s Office is stepping up its work under the law the state’s new red flag lawtraining 150 people Thursday and announcing plans to review cases to determine whether they qualify for a civil lawsuit to temporarily seize someone’s firearms.

When Minnesota implemented Extreme Risk Protection Orders early this year, it joined other states with similar processes. The law allows a court order to be issued prohibiting a person from owning or purchasing a firearm if the person poses a significant risk of harm to themselves or others.

Officials could wait for cases to come to them, but Ramsey County Attorney John Choi said they are intentionally asking for orders to help with homicide and suicide prevention. They are also intended to be used when there is a threat of mass harm, including school shootings.

As law enforcement agencies submit cases to the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office for review of charges, Choi announced Thursday that they will ask them to complete an investigative checklist, including whether an Extreme Risk Protection Order would be appropriate in the case. If prosecutors agree there is a legal basis to proceed, the county attorney’s office will petition the court to initiate the process.

“This is about preventing tragedies,” Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher said. “… Time and time again, … after the tragedy happens, we look at the police reports, the evidence, we talk to family members and they say, ‘Well, we tried to warn people. We called the police and told them what was going to happen. Or we knew there was a problem, but didn’t actually know how to deal with it properly.’”

According to the Minnesota Judicial Branch, 109 petitions for Extreme Risk Protection Orders were filed between the beginning of the year and last Friday, with 83 by a law enforcement agency and 26 by a citizen. Family members or housemates are among those who can apply.

There are two types of orders: an emergency order, which comes into effect immediately and lasts fourteen days, and a long-term order, which can only be issued after a court hearing and has a duration of six months to a year.

Among the Minnesota petitions, there were thirty in which emergency injunctions were granted; 66 when an emergency injunction was granted and then after a hearing a long-term injunction; five cases where a lengthy injunction was granted after a hearing; and eight cases where no warrant was issued, the judiciary said.

The use of the orders in cases of threats of self-harm and domestic violence

Although the term is not used in Minnesota law, they are commonly referred to as “red flag” laws.

Chris Carita, a national expert on violence prevention and threat management, said that in many states that have passed such laws, “they end up being kind of a tool that sits in the background. … The problem with that is that if no one takes responsibility for moving it forward, … you’re waiting for a tragedy to happen where you needed it, and then you’re not prepared to use it properly.”

With 73% of firearm deaths in the state classified as suicide between 2018 and 2021, it is important that Minnesota law include a caveat that allows cases to be sealed if only threats of self-harm are involved, Carita said.

“If a family member is suffering from a mental health crisis and is at risk of taking their own life, a judge has the ability to keep them out of public view, which helps preserve the dignity of a person who is likely experiencing a mental health crisis and needs help search,” said Carita.

When people are concerned about someone in their family and wonder, “Is there anything that doesn’t simply criminalize this risk?”, they should know that Extreme Risk Protection Orders are “a civil tool, so the focus is on removing that weapon of a person that could harm someone when there may be no other criminal activity present,” said St. Paul City Attorney Lyndsey Olson.

Rob Doar, senior vice president of government affairs for the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, said what they are most surprised about is “the discrepancy between the way the bill was sent and the way the orders are being issued.”

“We were told this was an important tool to give family members the ability to mediate with a loved one in crisis to ensure their safety,” he said. “In their execution, the vast majority of these orders are sought and granted from law enforcement, not family members.”

The Gun Owners Caucus also remains “concerned about the due process implications of ex parte orders that rely on the premise that removing a firearm addresses the individual in crisis without appropriate measures to address the individual themselves,” Doar said.

Some people also wonder why Extreme Risk Protection Orders are necessary in domestic violence cases when people can already apply for a protection order through the Minnesota court system. But Carita said: “The speed with which ERPO can be used and the precision in removing firearms from such situations early helps make the situation safer for victims of domestic violence.”

Most of the petitions for the orders have been filed outside the metro area. Ramsey County submitted three applications, Hennepin County for 24, Dakota County for nine and Washington and Anoka counties for four each, the judiciary said.

Thursday’s training, hosted by the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office, brought together law enforcement, prosecutors, victim advocates and those who work in the mental health field. Training will take place in the future, including with school staff, Choi said.

How to Apply for an Extreme Risk Protection Order

The Ramsey County Attorney’s Office has information about Extreme Risk Protection Orders, including how a family or household member can apply in Ramsey County, at bit.ly/40IlPKF.