Minnesota Bans Radar Jammers, Not Radar Detectors

The absence here is provable rather than assumed. The Office of the Revisor of Statutes runs the official full-text search over the Minnesota Statutes, and the quoted phrase "radar detector" returns no results in the 2025 edition. The single word "radar" returns exactly two sections: Minn. Stat. 169.14, headed "SPEED LIMITS, ZONES; RADAR," and Minn. Stat. 299C.063, which concerns bomb disposal units using ground-penetrating radar, magnetometers and metal detectors. The word "detector" returns three sections, none of them about vehicles: the data practices provision at 13.7905, the lie detector disclosure ban at 181.76, and 219.753, which requires a detector on certain cranes operating on railroad track. So the Legislature has legislated on speed-measuring technology and on detectors, just never on the two together.

What it did legislate is the countermeasure. Minn. Stat. 169.14, subd. 12 defines a radar jammer as any instrument, device or equipment designed or intended for use with a vehicle or otherwise to jam or interfere in any manner with a speed-measuring device operated by a peace officer, then bans the sale, offering for sale, use and possession of one in this state. Two features of that drafting matter. It is a possession offence, so a jammer sitting unpowered in a glovebox is already unlawful and no proof of use is needed. And it turns on design or intent rather than on the technology named, so a laser shifter or LIDAR jammer is caught by the same words even though the section is headed "Radar jammer." A device that only receives and warns, which is what a detector does, neither jams nor interferes and therefore falls outside the definition.

Commercial drivers are in a different position. Minn. Stat. 221.0314, subd. 6 says in full that Code of Federal Regulations, title 49, part 392, is incorporated by reference, and subd. 1(a) makes intrastate motor carriers comply with the federal regulations incorporated in that section, with private carriers and persons providing intrastate transportation described in Minn. Stat. 221.025 bound to the extent required by Minn. Stat. 221.031. Section 221.031, subd. 2(b)(3) in turn applies the subdivision 6 rules to private carriers operating vehicles with a gross vehicle weight over 10,000 pounds. Part 392 contains 49 CFR 392.71, under which no driver shall use a radar detector in a commercial motor vehicle or operate a commercial motor vehicle that is equipped with or contains any radar detector, and no motor carrier shall require or permit a driver to violate that rule. Minnesota's incorporation clause also swaps the enforcing body: under 221.0314, subd. 1(b), a reference to a federal agency means the Minnesota Department of Transportation and a reference to a federal administrative officer means its commissioner.

Where a detector may be mounted is a separate Minnesota question with a real answer. Minn. Stat. 169.71, subd. 1(a)(2) prohibits driving with any object suspended between the driver and the windshield, then lists what is allowed: sun visors, rearview mirrors, driver feedback and safety monitoring equipment mounted immediately behind or slightly above or below the rearview mirror, global positioning or navigation systems mounted near the bottommost portion of the windshield, electronic toll collection devices, and an identifying device under Minn. Stat. 169.58, subd. 5 near the bottom of the windshield. The list is closed and a radar detector is not on it, and paragraph (b) lifts clause (2) only for law enforcement vehicles while paragraph (c) lifts it for authorized emergency vehicles. A detector suction-cupped high on the glass or clipped to the visor is therefore exposed under a provision that has nothing to do with speed enforcement. A detector sitting on the dashboard is not suspended between the driver and the windshield and does not engage the clause at all.

One practical point: a detector buys no legal defence. Minn. Stat. 169.14, subd. 10 makes a radar or other speed-measuring reading admissible if the operating officer or traffic enforcement agent has sufficient training, testifies to how the device was set up and operated, the device was operated with minimal distortion or interference from outside sources, and it was tested by an accurate and reliable external mechanism, method or system at the time it was set up. Those four foundation conditions, not the presence of a detector, are what a contested speed case turns on in Minnesota.

Possessing or using a radar jammer is charged under Minn. Stat. 14, subd. 12, which sets no penalty of its own, so the chapter default in Minn. Stat. 89, subd. 1 applies: a petty misdemeanor, punished under subd. 2 by a fine of not more than $300 with no jury trial and no imprisonment. The same subdivision escalates the offence to a misdemeanor where it is committed in a manner or under circumstances likely to endanger a person or property, or where the driver has two or more petty misdemeanor convictions under chapter 169 within the preceding 12 months.

Minnesota does not inspect passenger vehicles periodically, so enforcement is roadside: Minn. Stat. 771 directs the State Patrol to run accelerated spot-check inspections for unsafe vehicles and equipment, and subd. 4 provides that use of the state's highways and streets constitutes consent to those inspections. 71 and appears at the annual commercial vehicle inspection required by Minn. Stat. 781 as well as at a roadside spot check, which under Minn. Stat. 771, subd. 2 leaves the operator with a signed and dated inspection document. An unlawfully mounted detector is cited separately under Minn. Stat. 71, subd. 1, again as a petty misdemeanor.