Minnesota Supreme Court: Minnesota law Only Criminalizes lack of Serial Number When US law Does

On February 14, 2022, Logan Hunter Vagle had a rollover accident near the intersection of Interstate 94 and Highway 65 in Fridley, Minnesota.  When a Minnesota State Trooper arrived and investigated the accident, Vagle admitted he had a pistol in the vehicle. The pistol was a homemade version of the Glock 19, which Vagle had assembled himself. Vagle is now listed as 24 years old, so he may have been less than 21 years old in 2022. Vagle does not appear to have any criminal history.  Logan Hunter Vagle has a youtube channel, but we have not verified if the owner of the channel is the same person named in the court cases. It appears likely the young man in the youtube channel is the same Logan Hunter Vagle.

Vagle was charged with two crimes, carrying a pistol without a permit, and possessing a pistol without a serial number. Carrying a pistol without a permit is a misdemeanor in Minnesota. Possessing a firearm without a “valid” serial number could be interpreted as a felony, according to Minnesota statute.

The local court dismissed the serial number charge on the grounds the statute was vague as applied.  The far-left Attorney General in Minnesota, Keith Ellison, appealed the decision to a Minnesota Appeals court. The appeals court reversed the district court decision. The Minnesota Supreme Court agreed to take up the case. The court ruled in Vagle’s favor on August 6, 2025. From the Minnesota Supreme Court Opinion:

Appellant Logan Hunter Vagle was charged with possession of a firearm that is not identified by a serial number, in violation of Minnesota Statutes section 609.667(3) (2024). Vagle assembled the firearm—a pistol—himself from parts he purchased. The firearm did not have a serial number. Minnesota has not established an independent firearm serial number regime, and federal law does not require that Vagle’s pistol have a serial number. The question before us is whether Vagle’s possession of the firearm violated section 609.667(3). We conclude that section 609.667(3) criminalizes the possession of a firearm that is not identified by a serial number only if federal law requires that a serial number be stamped, engraved, cast, or otherwise conspicuously placed on the firearm. Because federal law does not require a serial number on the firearm that Vagle possessed, we reverse.

Vagle appears to be a sympathetic figure, a young man without a criminal past who has since moved to Florida.  The Minnesota Supreme Court noted the State of Minnesota legally sold firearm which were not required to have a serial number. They noted holding the mere absence of a serial number to be illegal, when the firearm was legally made without a serial number, would make a large number of Minnesota residents into felons.

In July of 2024, the Federal Court of Appeals Eight Circuit struck down the Minnesota ban on issuing handgun carry permits to 18-20 year old residents of Minnesota. Vagle might not have been able to apply for a permit to carry when the incident occurred.

Five of the seven justices on the Minnesota Supreme Court were appointed by Governor Tim Walz. Chief Justice Hudson and Justice Procaccini dissented.Both were appointed by Governor Walz. One justice came to the Court during the proceedings and was not included in the case.  The opinion includes a deep dive into federal requirements for serial numbers on firearms. There was no requirement until 1968.  There was no requirement to put serial numbers on homemade firearms until the dubious regulatory requirement created during the Biden administration.

The requirement to place a serial number on homemade firearms has not been challenged in federal court. There is no historical precedent which supports such a law. Colonial or early Republic legislatures or the Congress could have passed such laws, but they did not do so.

The Supreme Court has held the regulatory change made by the Biden administration (involving homemade guns) was allowed under the authority given to them by Congress. They did not address whether the law was allowed under the Second Amendment. They are two separate issues.

©2025 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

 Gun Watch