Hearing on the MN Coin Bullion Dealer Law Severability - 11-27-2023 - hearing report

Tomthecoinguy

As most of you know, the 8th Circuit court of appeals ruled last year that the MN Coin bullion dealer law is unconstitutional. They also sent it back to the District Court to determine if the unconstitutional parts can be removed from the law, or if the whole law has to go down. The Minnesota Department of Commerce is currently not enforcing the law as they wait for the final determination of the courts.

The hearing to decide on the severability is Monday at 2:00 PM, at the Minneapolis Federal Courthouse, Courtroom 13W. The hearing is open to the Public, and you are welcome to attend! It will just be the lawyers and judge talking, but it could be very interesting.

Location:
Diana E. Murphy United States Courthouse,
300 S 4th Street, Suite 202,
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Courtroom: 13W
Judge: Nancy E. Brasel

Date: 11-27-2023
Time: 2:00 PM Central Time

If you do come say Hi, I get to sit at the Plaintiff's table, so that should be fun.

cameonut2011

For those who need or want more background:

https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/22/08/212936P.pdf

Tomthecoinguy

I just wanted to remind folks the hearing is today, for those interested in attending. I plan to report back on what was said.

Tomthecoinguy

I wanted to give everyone an update on the hearing Monday.

So that was a very strange hearing on Monday. As a little reminder in August of 2022, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals overruled the district court judge and ruled that the MN Coin Bullion dealer law is unconstitutional. It is unconstitutional because the law regulated transactions that happened entirely outside of the state. The 8th Circuit then sent it back to the district court to determine if the unconstitutional parts can be struck, and if there is anything left of the law that could be enforced.

We then filled our briefs saying the whole law should be struck down, and the state countered with their proposal to rewrite the law. After the briefs were filed, we waited for the judge to rule.

While we were waiting for the judge to rule, the Supreme court came out with a new decision, which is referred to as the Pork Producers’ case. The Pork Producer's case talked some about the Dormant Commerce Clause, which was what the 8th circuit used to strike down the MN law. The district court judge grabbed on to this, and asked the parties if in light of this new decision by the Supreme Court the MN law is in fact constitutional, and the 8th Circuit got it wrong.

Both the State and us agreed that the Pork Producer's case is not relevant, and that the Minnesota Law is in fact unconstitutional. That is right the State now concedes that the MN Coin Bullion Dealer Law is unconstitutional.

OK so now comes the really bizarre part. The judge still seems to think that the Pork producers' case means that the 8th Circuit got it wrong when they overruled her on appeal. She seems to think the MN Coin Bullion Dealer law is constitutional. She then asked the state a bunch of questions, and the State was explaining to the judge that the 8th Circuit was right, and that the MN Coin Bullion Dealer law was unconstitutional. I felt like I was in the twilight zone, with the State now arguing our position. The judge held her ground, and at one point even asked what she was supposed to do when she was convinced the MN law was constitutional, but both parties think it is unconstitutional.

We then went on to discuss the proposals on severability and again it appeared the judge was against us. At times I even wondered if she bothered to read our briefs.

If she does rule against us, I think their is a very good chance she would be overturned again on appeal.

It has now been 15 months since the case was remanded to the District court. The long delays would be very frustrating, if it was not for the fact that the State is currently not enforcing the law. I am looking forward to the day when this case is over and the MN Bullion Dealer law is gone for good.

Let me know if you have any questions about the hearing, or case in general.

-Tom

NJCoin

Totally crazy that your judge is putting pride ahead of reason, and not just striking down the law in light of the State's concession. Of course, your legislature can now simply repeal the law and render the whole thing moot.

spacehayduke

Tom, keep up the good work and it looks like you can succeed on appeal if the judge rules it as constitutional in this round.

Best, SH

SurfinxHI

Good job Tom!

BLUEJAYWAY

Appreciate your efforts and time spent reporting on this matter.

cameonut2011

@Tomthecoinguy said:
While we were waiting for the judge to rule, the Supreme court came out with a new decision, which is referred to as the Pork Producers’ case. The Pork Producer's case talked some about the Dormant Commerce Clause, which was what the 8th circuit used to strike down the MN law. The district court judge grabbed on to this, and asked the parties if in light of this new decision by the Supreme Court the MN law is in fact constitutional, and the 8th Circuit got it wrong.

Both the State and us agreed that the Pork Producer's case is not relevant, and that the Minnesota Law is in fact unconstitutional. That is right the State now concedes that the MN Coin Bullion Dealer Law is unconstitutional.

OK so now comes the really bizarre part. The judge still seems to think that the Pork producers' case means that the 8th Circuit got it wrong when they overruled her on appeal. She seems to think the MN Coin Bullion Dealer law is constitutional. She then asked the state a bunch of questions, and the State was explaining to the judge that the 8th Circuit was right, and that the MN Coin Bullion Dealer law was unconstitutional. I felt like I was in the twilight zone, with the State now arguing our position. The judge held her ground, and at one point even asked what she was supposed to do when she was convinced the MN law was constitutional, but both parties think it is unconstitutional.

We then went on to discuss the proposals on severability and again it appeared the judge was against us. At times I even wondered if she bothered to read our briefs.

If she does rule against us, I think their is a very good chance she would be overturned again on appeal.

It has now been 15 months since the case was remanded to the District court. The long delays would be very frustrating, if it was not for the fact that the State is currently not enforcing the law. I am looking forward to the day when this case is over and the MN Bullion Dealer law is gone for good.

>

It shouldn’t matter whether she disagrees with the 8th Circuit or not, she is duty bound to honor it. The 8th Circuit’s decision is controlling. If there is disagreement, Minnesota could have filed a petition for rehearing en banc or sought certiorari with request for vacatur and remand in light of the new SCOTUS case.