Attorney General Keith Ellison issued a second legal opinion Wednesday in an effort to clear up ongoing confusion surrounding a new law impacting school resource officers (SROs).
The changes to Minnesota’s school discipline laws, included in a DFL-backed education omnibus bill passed last session, prohibit school employees and agents of a school, such as SROs, from using the prone restraint on students or any other hold that restricts a student’s ability to breathe or communicate distress, results in straddling their torso, or places pressure on their “head, throat, neck, chest, lungs, sternum, diaphragm, back or abdomen.”
Ellison issued a legal opinion Aug. 22 to clarify that these restrictions do not apply in cases where there is a threat of bodily harm or death. This letter did little to ease the concerns of law enforcement as nearly 40 police agencies have since removed their SROs from schools.
Police leaders have thus far maintained that the changes create two sets of standards for police and lack clarity in cases where there is no threat of bodily harm or death.
Ellison’s supplementary opinion released Wednesday says the restrictions do not apply in cases where SROs are carrying out their “lawful duties,” such as making an arrest or enforcing a court order.
“The Amendment does not limit the types of reasonable force that may be used by school staff and agents to prevent bodily harm or death. It also does not limit the types of reasonable force that may be used by public officers to carry out their lawful duties, as described in Minnesota Statutes section 609.06, subdivision 1(1). The test for reasonable force remains unchanged, and is highly fact-specific,” the opinion says.
Ellison also said the restrictions do not apply when an SRO is acting to prevent bodily harm or death, meaning they don’t have to “wait until someone is already injured before intervening with reasonable force.”
“In recent meetings with … the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Minnesota Sheriffs’ Association, and the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, participants raised other important questions. Those questions demonstrate that coordinated training and guidance from trusted law enforcement leaders could be very beneficial in this area and there may be room for additional clarification from the Legislature,” Ellison’s opinion concludes.
Leaders from those groups have yet to comment on the new opinion but were scheduled to meet Wednesday night with Gov. Tim Walz, Ellison, and legislators.
“Another opinion just demonstrates the need for legislative action to fix this law. Students, parents, educators, school staff, and [School] Resource Officers all deserve a crystal-clear law that everyone can understand without needing further clarification,” Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, said in a statement Wednesday night.
While expressing some openness to the idea, Gov. Walz has resisted calls to convene a special session as 44 members of his party have gone on record saying they don’t want to revise the law.
Cynthia Lonnquist, a Republican candidate for the special election in House District 52B, said it will be her “top priority to get School Resource Officers back in schools.”
“I am profoundly concerned to hear that Eagan schools will be losing their School Resource Officers. Instead of being eliminated, the SRO role should be expanded to address cyber-bullying, sexting, etc.,” she said in a statement. “Democrats hold the majority at the Capitol and have had weeks to fix the problem. Doing nothing means more and more Minnesota schools are losing their SROs — now Eagan students will also be less safe, and critical intervention not happening. I hope every candidate for 52B will make very clear where they stand on this issue and tell voters if they will support getting SROs back in schools.”
Anthony Gockowski
Anthony Gockowski is Editor-in-Chief of Alpha News. He previously worked as an editor for The Minnesota Sun and Campus Reform, and wrote for the Daily Caller.
