Background
Brian and Katie Lafferty are licensed foster parents who keep firearms in their Washington County home for self-defense and recreation. When they sought to renew their foster-home license in 2020, the County required them to sign a form barring concealed carry in the presence of foster children and demanding information about their firearms and ammunition. State regulations also required firearms in foster homes to be locked, inaccessible to foster children, and unloaded.
The Laffertys sued state and county officials, alleging that the conditions violated the federal and Wisconsin constitutions. After an earlier appeal produced a remand for reconsideration under the Supreme Court’s historical-tradition test for firearm regulations, the circuit court again entered summary judgment for the officials. While the second appeal was pending, the Department of Children and Families amended its rule effective December 1, 2025, altering the concealed-carry and storage provisions.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded with instructions. It held that the Laffertys did not waive their federal or state constitutional rights merely by voluntarily becoming foster parents. It also concluded that the government’s firearm-disclosure requirement and related discovery demands were impermissibly overbroad.
The court determined that the 2025 rule amendment eliminated portions of the dispute, particularly complaints concerning concealed carry and certain storage requirements, but did not make the entire appeal moot. On the remaining merits, it held that conditioning a foster-home license on storing firearms unloaded violated both the Second Amendment and article I, section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution. That requirement therefore had to be struck from the administrative rule.
Key Takeaways
- Applying to serve as a foster parent does not itself waive constitutional firearm rights.
- Wisconsin may not require foster parents to keep their firearms unloaded as a condition of foster-home licensure.
- Government demands for detailed information about foster parents’ present and former firearm ownership may be impermissibly overbroad.
Why It Matters
The decision applies constitutional protections within a heavily regulated licensing program and rejects the premise that accepting a public benefit automatically permits the government to impose otherwise unconstitutional conditions. It also confirms that an agency cannot avoid review of every disputed practice simply by amending its rule while litigation is pending.
For Wisconsin foster-care regulators and licensing authorities, the ruling requires removal of the unloaded-firearm condition and closer tailoring of firearm-related disclosures. More broadly, it reinforces that regulations burdening armed self-defense in the home must satisfy the historical-tradition framework governing Second Amendment claims.