Was happy to join fellow District 30 legislators Sen. Lucero and Rep. Novotny at the Capitol on Tuesday.
Dear Neighbor,
Minnesota’s 2026 legislative session began Tuesday and it’s good to be back at the Capitol working for District 30A residents. Two bills I authored already received hearings during the first week and here is a look at those:
One bill (HF 2809) I’ve authored simply prohibits protests at residential properties received a committee hearing on Wednesday. To be clear, my bill does not ban petition for redress of grievance. There are myriad ways in the modern world for people to express their discontent with policy or personalities. People can protest at the Capitol. They can protest at city hall. They can protest outside businesses and public officials’ offices. But there are constitutionally recognized time, place, and manner restrictions – and one of those restrictions properly ought to be our homes.
We have other laws like disturbing the peace, trespass laws, things of that nature. Unfortunately, with the new political climate that we find ourselves in, increasingly people are willing to cross those lines, to violate those standards that we've collectively had in our culture to respect each other's privacy, respect each other's domiciles. That requires us to actually codify into the law that it's not appropriate to protest outside of somebody's house.
One of the arguments that I've heard in response to this is, well, what if they're on public property? People should be able to do whatever they want on public property.
Really?
Then explain to me the list of rules outside of any given public park. Explain to me the publicly listed hours of a public library or a school or explain to me the fact that you can only go the speed limit when you're driving your car down the road.
My bill fits right into that established precedent that you can’t just cite the fact that it’s a public street and then use that as an excuse to violate other people’s peaceful enjoyment of their property, which they are entitled to as residents of the state of Minnesota and citizens of the United States.
We’ll see what kind of progress we can make with this bill this session. It truly needn’t be a partisan issue in a House that’s tied 67-67. To the contrary, this bill should receive strong bipartisan support because it’s applicable to everyone. Whether you are a public official or not, a Democrat or Republican, it doesn’t matter. My bill is about a simple principle: every one of us, as residents of this state and citizens of the United States, have a moral and constitutionally protected right to the peaceful enjoyment of our property – particularly our homes. That’s what this bill supports.
A second bill (HF 3380) I’ve authored also received a committee hearing this week. It’s a “three strikes” bill, which stiffens penalties for repeat offenders of crimes involving firearms.
Minnesota law already recognizes repeat violent offenders as a serious threat. But under current statute, enhanced sentences for these offenders are optional – and too often, they’re not applied. Chronic violent offenders cycle through the system, receive downward departures, and return to our communities.
My bill says that when someone commits three or more violent felonies involving firearms, the court must impose an aggravated sentence – up to the statutory maximum – and that offender must serve the full term. No early release, no probation, and no cycling back into the community after repeated armed violence.
I presented a similar bill last year which had a broader focus on any violent felony. While we were unable to come to agreement on that proposal, I would certainly hope that this narrower approach focusing on those who habitually commit violent felonies with a firearm would be met with bipartisan approval.
By the time someone commits their third violent felony with a firearm, they have demonstrated beyond any doubt that they pose an ongoing danger to public safety. I remain hopeful that protecting the innocent from those proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on three separate occasions will be a higher priority for this committee than disarming innocent and vulnerable Minnesotans.
I’ll keep you posted as these bills (hopefully) make their way through the process between now and when we are scheduled to adjourn May 17. For now, please stay in touch.
Sincerely,
Walter