Minnesota's Open Meeting Law: What Chapter 13D Actually Punishes
Chapter 13D never defines a meeting, never voids a decision, and almost never removes anyone from office. Here is what it does do, section by section.
Read →Privacy & Data
Breaches, location data, surveillance, and who holds what about you.
Someone Cloned Your Voice or Your Face. In Minnesota You Have One Real Claim — and It Is Not the New Statute.
Minnesota's 2026 forged-likeness amendment is criminal only, and no Minnesota statute creates a right of publicity. What is actually left to plead, and what it pays.
Read →Who Made the Call? TCPA Traceback and the Attribution Problem
Federal law built an entire caller-authentication apparatus after 2019 — STIR/SHAKEN, traceback, the Robocall Mitigation Database. None of it is a plaintiff's tool, and here is why attribution still fails.
Read →The DPPA Pays $2,500 Per Lookup Without Proof of Harm. The Clock Starts the Day It Happens, Not the Day You Find Out.
18 U.S.C. § 2724 fixes liquidated damages at $2,500 with no showing of injury. But the Eighth Circuit applies the occurrence rule to the four-year clock, and Minnesota classifies driver data by a federal cross-reference frozen at May 23, 2005 — which the legislature loosened in 2026.
Read →AI-Assisted Identity Theft: What the Federal Data Actually Shows, and What It Cannot
The FBI tagged 460 of its 31,675 identity theft complaints with any AI reference in 2025, and the FTC's dataset has no AI field at all. What the federal sources actually document — and the defense.
Read →Nonconsensual Intimate Images in Minnesota: The Deepfake Claim Is the Stronger One
Minnesota's civil claim for a fake sexual image carries a statutory penalty ten times the one for a real image — and drops an element. Four statutes, two clocks, one federal lever.
Read →Minnesota's Do-Not-Call Law Expired in 2012. Here Is What Actually Governs Robocalls to a Minnesota Number.
Minn. Stat. §§ 325E.311–.316 — the state no-call registry and its caller-ID provision — expired December 31, 2012. What survives, what replaced it, and where the private remedy is.
Read →Minnesota's Consumer Data Privacy Act Exempts Small Businesses — and Then Regulates Them Anyway
The MCDPA is codified at Minn. Stat. §§ 325M.10–.21, not in a chapter of its own. Its 21 exclusions are where the surprises live: the small-business exemption carries a carve-back with no size threshold, and there is no general exemption for nonprofits.
Read →A Minnesota Student's Record Rights Do Not Wait for the Eighteenth Birthday
Under 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(d), FERPA rights pass to the student at 18 or on attending a postsecondary institution — whichever comes first. Minn. Stat. § 13.32 then supplies nineteen clauses of permitted disclosure, a parent veto over juvenile justice requests, and a ban on monitoring school-issued devices.
Read →Minnesota's Genetic Testing Statute Reaches Every Employer — but a Narrower Set of Information Than Federal GINA
Minn. Stat. § 181.974 has no employer-size threshold, no agency to exhaust, and a treble-damages private action. It also protects less information than GINA does, and it has no exceptions at all.
Read →Minnesota's Invasion of Privacy Tort: What Lake v. Wal-Mart Created, What It Refused, and What Later Cases Took Back
Minnesota recognized no common-law privacy tort until 1998. Lake v. Wal-Mart adopted three branches and refused a fourth — and it decided nothing about the elements, which later cases have mostly narrowed.
Read →Public Employee Personnel Data in Minnesota: You Cannot Settle It Quietly
Minn. Stat. § 13.43 makes eight categories of government personnel data public, voids confidentiality terms in public-employment settlements, and applies that rule to court orders too.
Read →Minnesota Tells Businesses What They May Not Do With a Social Security Number. It Never Says What Happens If They Do It.
Minn. Stat. § 325E.59 imposes seven prohibitions on a private business's use of Social Security numbers plus an affirmative access-control duty — and contains no penalty, damages, or enforcement subdivision at all. The remedy question has to be answered from outside the section.
Read →Ignore a Minnesota Agency's Consent Letter for 60 Days and the Rule Treats Your Silence as Yes
Chapter 13 gives the subject of government data four separate rights: the Tennessen warning, a ten-business-day access clock, a 30-day correction procedure, and § 13.08 damages. The use limit in § 13.05, subd. 4 is the one with teeth.
Read →Minnesota Has No Biometric Privacy Act — and the Statute That Comes Closest Reaches Only Government Employers
Minnesota Statutes use the word 'biometric' in 17 sections, and none of them is an Illinois-style BIPA. What actually reaches a fingerprint, faceprint, or voiceprint in Minnesota is chapter 13, one honesty-testing statute, and a school fingerprint-card rule.
Read →Minnesota's Social Media Manipulation Act Regulates Disclosure, Not Design — and the Statute That Changes That Was Signed in May 2026 and Is Not in Force Until July 1, 2027
Sections 325M.30–.34 compel a platform to publish statistics about itself and give no one a private cause of action. Section 325M.40, added by Laws 2026, ch. 111, creates a $10,000 statutory-damages claim for a child or parent — effective July 1, 2027.
Read →Your Phone's Location Is Protected by the Fourth Amendment. Minnesota Decided That Twelve Years Ago.
In Chatrie v. United States, a divided Supreme Court held that pulling a person's location data from Google is a search. Minnesota's Legislature required a warrant for exactly that in 2014 — before Carpenter, and long before this term.
Read →Three Minnesota Privacy Laws Apply to Your Company. The One Nobody Plans For Is the Only One With a Private Right of Action.
Minn. Stat. § 325E.61, chapter 325M, and chapter 13 run on three different definitions, three different triggers, and three different enforcers — and § 13.05, subd. 11 pulls private contractors into the Data Practices Act whether or not the contract says a word about it.
Read →Chapter 13 Is the Discovery You Get Before You Have a Case
Minnesota's Data Practices Act gives a data subject a ten-business-day response deadline, a written-denial requirement that must cite a statute, and two enforcement tracks. Most people use none of it.
Read →Minnesota Body-Camera Footage Is Private by Default. Here Is Who Can Actually Get It.
Minn. Stat. § 13.825 classifies body-worn camera data as private or nonpublic and then carves out five exceptions. The retention floor is 90 days — which is the number that decides most cases.
Read →Your Carrier Was Fined $57 Million for Mishandling Your Location Data. You Were Not a Party, and Minnesota Law Will Not Let You Be One.
In FCC v. AT&T, the Court upheld the FCC's power to impose forfeiture penalties without a jury. Minnesota's own Consumer Data Privacy Act took effect July 31, 2025 — with real rights, and enforcement reserved exclusively to the Attorney General.
Read →Your Company Was Breached. Minnesota Gives You No Deadline in Days — Which Is Worse Than a Deadline.
Minn. Stat. § 325E.61 requires notice 'in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay,' plus notice to the national credit bureaus within 48 hours when more than 500 people are notified at one time. Enforcement is the Attorney General's alone — and GLBA financial institutions are exempt outright.
Read →The Supreme Court Just Took Your Internet Provider Off the Hook. Minnesota Already Knows Who Gets Sued Instead.
In Cox v. Sony Music, the Court erased a $1 billion verdict and held that an ISP is not liable merely for serving subscribers it knows are infringing. The last time the music industry could not reach the middleman, it sued a mother of four from Brainerd.
Read →Minnesota Is a One-Party Consent State for Conversations and Not a Consent State at All for Images
Minn. Stat. § 626A.02, subd. 2(d) lets a party to a conversation record it, and § 626A.13 gives the person recorded a civil action worth at least $10,000 when it does not. Section 609.746 governs cameras, contains no one-party rule, and creates no civil remedy at all.
Read →A Minnesota Clinic Can Run a Perfectly HIPAA-Compliant Release Process and Still Be Breaking Minnesota Law
The Minnesota Health Records Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 144.291–144.298, requires signed consent for releases that HIPAA permits outright. Section 144.292 sets a 30-day access deadline and a capped fee schedule; § 144.298 gives the patient a private action against the requester as well as the releaser.
Read →