Born alive laws in the United States

Fetal homicide laws, also known as born alive laws, in the United States
  Homicide or murder
  Other crime against fetus
  Depends on age of fetus
  Assaulting mother
  No law on feticide

Born alive laws in the United States are fetal rights laws that extend various criminal laws, such as homicide and assault, to cover unlawful death or other harm done to a fetus in utero or to an infant that has been delivered. The basis for such laws stems from advances in medical science and social perception, which allow a fetus to be seen and medically treated as an individual in the womb and perceived socially as a person, for some or all of the pregnancy.

Such laws overturn the common law legal principle that until physically born, a fetus or unborn child does not have independent legal existence and therefore cannot be the victim of such crimes. They often provide for transferred intent, sometimes called "transferred malice", so that an unlawful act which happens to affect a pregnant woman and thus harm her fetus can be charged as a crime with the fetus as a victim, in addition to crimes against any other people.

History of born alive law

Common law

The born alive rule was originally a principle at common law in England that was carried to the United States and other former colonies of the British Empire. First formulated by William Staunford, it was later set down by Edward Coke in his Institutes of the Laws of England: "If a woman be quick with childe, and by a potion or otherwise killeth it in her wombe, or if a man beat her, whereby the child dyeth in her body, and she is delivered of a dead childe, this is great misprision, and no murder; but if he childe be born alive and dyeth of the potion, battery, or other cause, this is murder; for in law it is accounted a reasonable creature, in rerum natura, when it is born alive."

The phrase "a reasonable creature, in rerum natura" as a whole is usually translated as "a life in being", i.e. where the umbilical cord has been severed and the baby has a life independently of the mother. "Reasonable" here is used as in the 16th century, meaning "something that may reasonably be considered [a living creature]". In English law this meant that until born, the fetus was not accounted a person under criminal law, nor a separate person from its mother, and could not have the capacity to be the subject of an actus reus ('wrongful act') – a prerequisite for a criminal offense in the absence of any statute to the contrary.

Subsequent developments

In the 19th century, some began to argue for legal recognition of the moment of conception as the beginning of a human being, basing their argument on growing awareness of the processes of pregnancy and fetal development.[self-published source] They succeeded in drafting laws which criminalized abortion in all forms and made it punishable in secular courts. Advances in the state of the art in medical science, including medical knowledge related to the viability of the fetus, and the ease with which the fetus can be observed in the womb as a living being, treated clinically as a human being, and (by certain stages) demonstrate neural and other processes considered as human, have led a number of jurisdictions – in particular in the United States – to supplant or abolish this common law principle.

Changes to the law proceed piecemeal, from case to case and from statute to statute, rather than wholesale. One such landmark case with respect to the rule was Commonwealth vs. Cass, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where the court held that the stillbirth of an eight-month-old fetus, whose mother had been injured by a motorist, constituted vehicular homicide. By a majority decision, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a viable fetus constituted a "person" for the purposes of vehicular homicide law. In the opinion of the justices, "We think that the better rule is that infliction of perinatal injuries resulting in the death of a viable fetus, before or after it is born, is homicide."

Several courts have held that it is not their function to revise statute law by abolishing the born alive rule, and have stated that such changes in the law should come from the legislature. In 1970 in Keeler v. Superior Court of Amador County, the California Supreme Court dismissed a murder indictment against a man who had caused the stillbirth of the child of his estranged pregnant wife, stating that "the courts cannot go so far as to create an offense by enlarging a statute, by inserting or deleting words, or by giving the terms used false or unusual meanings ... Whether to extend liability for murder in California is a determination solely within the province of the Legislature."

Several legislatures passed laws to explicitly include deaths and injuries to fetuses in utero. The general policy has been that an attacker who causes the stillbirth of a fetus should be punished for the destruction of that fetus in the same way as an attacker who attacks a person and causes their death. Some legislatures have simply expanded their existing offences to explicitly include fetuses in utero. Others have created wholly new, and separate, offences.

Federal laws

The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act ("BAIPA" Pub. L. 107–207 (text) (PDF), 116 Stat. 926, enacted August 5, 2002, 1 U.S.C. § 8) extends legal protection to an infant born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion. It passed into law on August 5, 2002. The law defines a "born alive" infant as the complete expulsion of an infant at any stage of development that has a heartbeat, pulsation of the umbilical cord, breath, or voluntary muscle movement, regardless of circumstances of birth or severance of the umbilical cord, and provides rights for such infants. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act is a proposed law that would provide criminal penalties to any practitioner who denies a born-alive infant medical care.

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act (Public Law 108-212) recognizes a "child in utero" as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb". It applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on federal properties, against certain federal officials and employees, and by members of the military, as well as certain crimes (including some acts of terrorism) which count as federal offenses even if outside the United States. The act explicitly provides that it may not "be construed to permit the prosecution" of any person in relation to consensual abortion, medical treatment of a mother or her fetus, or any woman with regard to her own fetus. It passed into law on April 1, 2004, and is codified under two sections of the United States Code: Title 18, Chapter 1 (Crimes), §1841 (18 USC 1841), and the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Title 10, Chapter 22 §919a (Article 119a). The law was both hailed and vilified by legal observers who interpreted the measure as a step toward granting legal personhood to human fetuses.

List of laws by state

Overview

Born-alive legislation on abortion by state
State Law Status Summary
 Arizona SB 1367 (2017) Active In 2017, Arizona enacted SB 1367, requiring physicians to file a report on and use all available medical means to preserve the life of any infant born alive after an abortion. The bill was signed into law by Gov. Doug Ducey.
 Arkansas Ark. Code § 20-16-604 Active Arkansas law requires providers to file a report to the state if an infant is born alive during or after an abortion attempt. It also requires providers to "take all medically appropriate and reasonable steps to preserve the life and health" of the born-alive infant.
 Florida HB 1129 (2013) – Infants Born Alive Act Active Florida's Infants Born Alive Act (2013) mandates that infants born alive during or after an abortion receive the same medical care as any newborn, be promptly transferred to a hospital, and have the incident reported to the state. Failure to provide care or report violations is a misdemeanor. The law was unanimously passed by the legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Scott in 2013.
 Indiana Ind. Code § 16-34-2-3 Active Indiana law requires physicians to take all reasonable steps to preserve the life of any infant born alive after an abortion. Providers must also report such births to the state.
 Kansas HB 2313 (2023) – Born-Alive Infants Protection Act Active Kansas' Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (2023) requires medical professionals to provide life-saving care to any infant born alive after an abortion and transport the newborn to a hospital, with criminal penalties for failure to do so. Passed by the legislature in 2023; Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill as "unnecessary," but the legislature overrode the veto, and it became law.
 Kentucky SB 9 (2021) – Born-Alive Infant Protection Act Active Kentucky's Born-Alive Infant Protection Act (2021) requires doctors to "provide life-saving care if a baby survives an abortion attempt", making it a felony for a physician to "refuse to care for an infant born alive". The bill passed the General Assembly with veto-proof majorities; Gov. Andy Beshear allowed it to become law without his signature in 2021.
 Michigan Act 687 (2002) – Born Alive Infant Protection Act Active Michigan's Born Alive Infant Protection Act (2002) defines any infant born alive at any stage of development as a legal person and mandates that health providers report and give immediate medical care to any infant born alive after an abortion. Michigan's law also requires emergency transfer to a hospital if an abortion outside a hospital yields a live birth. In 2023, Michigan amended certain definitions in this law, but the requirement to care for born-alive infants remains in effect.
 Minnesota Minn. Stat. § 145.423 (1976) Repealed Prior to 2023, Minnesota law stated that "all reasonable measures…shall be taken by responsible medical personnel to preserve the life and health of the born alive infant" after an abortion. In 2023, Gov. Tim Walz signed an update replacing "preserve the life and health" with a requirement to "care for the infant who is born alive".
 Missouri Mo. Rev. Stat. § 188.030 (2017) Active Missouri law requires a second physician to attend abortions at 20+ weeks for care of any potentially viable infant. Providers must give immediate care and hospital transfer to born-alive infants. As of 2025, these provisions remain in statute, and additional legislation is pending (e.g. HB 1119).
 Montana HB 625 (2023) – Born-Alive Infant Protection Act Active In 2023, the Montana Legislature passed (and Gov. Greg Gianforte signed) a law requiring that any infant born alive after an attempted abortion receive appropriate medical care and be transported to a hospital. This came just months after Montana voters rejected a ballot measure, the 2022 Montana Legislative Referendum 131, that would have imposed criminal penalties on providers for failing to care for a born-alive infant after abortion. The 2023 law carries reduced penalties (up to 5 years in prison, rather than 20) and allows "comfort care" if a newborn is unlikely to survive, addressing concerns raised during the failed referendum.
 New York New York Public Health Law § 4164 Repealed New York's Reproductive Health Act (2019) removed previous state provisions (Public Health Law § 4164) that had required life-saving measures and legal protection for any infant born alive during an abortion. As a result, New York law no longer contains any specific "born-alive" statutes.
 North Carolina SB 20 (2023) – Care for Women, Children, and Families Act Active In 2019, North Carolina passed SB 359, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, to require medical care for infants who survive abortion, with felony penalties for noncompliance. Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed the bill, and an override attempt failed. A similar bill in 2021 met the same fate. In 2023, however, the legislature overrode Cooper's veto of SB 20, a broader law on abortion that restricted most abortions after 12 weeks. The law, which is now in effect, has a provision that requires healthcare providers to offer the same level of care to any infant born alive after an abortion as to any newborn of the same gestational age, ensure immediate hospital transfer, and submit required reports.
 Ohio SB 157 (2021) – Born-Alive Reporting and Penalties Act Active Ohio's Born-Alive Reporting and Penalties Act (2021) requires that any infant born alive after an attempted abortion be given life-sustaining care and have the incident reported to the Ohio Department of Health. The law passed along party lines and was signed by Gov. Mike DeWine in December 2021.
 Oklahoma 63 Okla. Stat. § 1-737.10 (2017) Active Oklahoma law requires physicians to provide care to preserve the life of an infant born alive after an abortion, and to report any such live birth to state authorities. Since 2022, abortion has been mostly banned in Okahoma.
 Pennsylvania 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3210–3211 (1989) – Abortion Control Act Active Pennsylvania's Abortion Control Act (1989), upheld in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, requires that for any abortion after fetal viability, a second physician must be present "in the same room" to take charge of the newborn. If the infant is born alive, that law requires that a second physician "shall take control of the child immediately after complete extraction from the mother and shall provide immediate medical care for the child, taking all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the child's life and health."
 South Dakota HB 1051 (2021) – Born-Alive Infants Protection Act Active South Dakota's Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (2021) mandates that any infant born alive after an abortion receive the same medical care as any other newborn. Penalties apply for failure to comply, and incidents must be reported to the state. The law was signed by Gov. Kristi Noem in February 2021.
 Texas HB 16 (2019) – Born-Alive Civil Cause of Action Act Active Texas' Born-Alive Civil Cause of Action Act (2019) requires providers to ensure that if a child is born alive, the physician "must exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child" as would be required for any live-born infant. It also instituted a reporting requirement.
 West Virginia HB 4007 (2020) – Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act Active West Virginia's Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (2020) requires that medical providers use "reasonable medical judgment" to preserve the life of any infant born alive after an abortion, just as they would for any other newborn of similar gestational age. Violations subject the provider to discipline by the medical licensing board. It passed with bipartisan support and was signed by Gov. Jim Justice in March 2020.
 Wisconsin AB 179 (2019) / SB 16 (2021) / AB 63 (2023) / AB 382 (2025) Failed Since 2019, the Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature has repeatedly introduced Born-Alive Infant Protection bills—in 2019, 2021, 2023, and 2025—aiming to require life-saving care for infants who survive abortion and to criminalize failure to provide it. Gov. Tony Evers vetoed the measures in 2019, 2021, and 2023, calling them unnecessary since infanticide is already illegal. As of 2025, Wisconsin has no separate born-alive statute.

California

§187 of the California Penal Code was amended to redefine murder to include the unlawful killing of a fetus. The term "fetus" was not initially defined.

In People v. Smith (1976) the court qualified this as signifying a viable fetus, holding that until the capability for independent existence is attained by a fetus "there is only the expectancy and potentiality for human life". They reasoned that the U.S. Supreme Court had implicitly stated in various cases dealing with abortion, that destruction of a nonviable fetus did not constitute taking a human life. As homicide was the unlawful destruction of a human life, proof was required that the unlawful destruction of a human life had in fact occurred. Thus it was held that the defendant was guilty of abortion, but not homicide.

In People v. Davis (1994), the California Supreme Court examined this and concluded fetal viability was not essential for rights to exist. They reasoned that abortion cases such as Roe v. Wade discuss where to draw the line for legitimate state interest in situations where the interests of fetus and mother conflict. Such cases do not discuss, and do not preclude, a legitimate state interest in protecting the potentiality of human life perhaps arising at a different time in situations where the rights of the fetus do not have to be set against the rights of the mother.

Minnesota

Vehicular homicide, death to an unborn child, and injury to an unborn child are three separate offences, under the umbrella of criminal vehicular operation.

References

  1. ↑ Cited in "The New "Fetal Protection": The Wrong Answer to the Crisis of Inadequate Health Care for Women and Children" Archived 2011-07-20 at the Wayback Machine, Linda Fentiman, 2006, note 119, (abstract and download link)
  2. ↑ Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 1994 Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 1994 [1997] UKHL 31, [1998] 1 Cr App Rep 91, [1997] 3 All ER 936, [1997] 3 WLR 421, [1997] Crim LR 829, [1998] AC 245 (24 July 1997), House of Lords
  3. 1 2 Sheena Meredith (2005). Policing Pregnancy: The Law And Ethics of Obstetric Conflict. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. p. 182. ISBN 0-7546-4412-X.
  4. ↑ William M. Connolly (2002). One Life: How the U.S. Supreme Court Deliberately Distorted the History, Science and Law of Abortion. Xlibris Corporation. ISBN 1-4010-3786-0.
  5. 1 2 3 John (John A.) Seymour (2000). Childbirth and the Law. Oxford University Press. pp. 140–143. ISBN 0-19-826468-2.
  6. ↑ David C. Brody; James R. Acker; Wayne A. Logan (2001). "Criminal Homicide". Criminal Law. Jones and Bartlett. p. 411. ISBN 0-8342-1083-5.
  7. ↑ "Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 (2002 - H.R. 2175)".
  8. ↑ Archived 2012-01-06 at the Wayback Machine Text of Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
  9. ↑ "Senate Bill 1367 – Duty to Preserve Life of Infant Born Alive; Arizona Revised Statutes § 36‑2301" (PDF). Arizona State Legislature. March 31, 2017. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  10. ↑ Rau, Alia Beard. "Arizona Legislature approves controversial abortion bill". The Arizona Republic. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  11. ↑ Brodie, Mark (2017-03-30). "New Abortion Bill Reaches Governor's Desk". KJZZ. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  12. ↑ "Arkansas Code § 20‑16‑604 – Born‑alive infant protection – Cause of action – Definitions". Justia. Arkansas Code (2024). Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  13. ↑ "HB 1129 — Infants Born Alive Act". Florida Senate. March 12, 2013. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  14. ↑ Koff, Rochelle (June 5, 2013). "Rick Scott signs abortion bill into law". Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  15. ↑ "Indiana Code § 16‑34‑2‑3 – Infanticide Prevention; Infant Born Alive; Duty to Provide Care". Indiana General Assembly. 2019. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  16. ↑ "Summary of Legislation – HB 2313, Born‑Alive Infants Protection Act" (PDF). Kansas Legislature. Kansas Legislative Research Department. 2023. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  17. ↑ Smith, Sherman (2023-04-26). "Kansas Legislature overrides governor's veto of anti-abortion bill". Kansas Reflector. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  18. ↑ "SR 9 — Born‑Alive Infant Protection Act (SB 9)". Kentucky Legislature Legislative Record. Kentucky General Assembly. January 21, 2021. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  19. ↑ Finerman, Grace (2021-01-22). "'Born alive' bill becomes Kentucky law". WKYT. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  20. ↑ Barton, Ryland (2021-01-23). "Beshear Allows 'Born Alive' Abortion Bill To Become Law Without Signature". Louisville Public Media. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  21. ↑ "Michigan Compiled Laws, Act 687 of 2002 – Born Alive Infant Protection Act" (PDF). Michigan Legislature. State of Michigan. 2002. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  22. ↑ Robertson, Lori (2019-03-04). "The Facts on the Born-Alive Debate". FactCheck.org. Retrieved 2025-08-07. Six states require some reporting on abortions that result in a baby born alive: Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Oklahoma and Texas.
  23. ↑ "Minnesota Statutes § 145.423 — Recognition of Infant Who Is Born Alive". Minnesota Legislature — Revisor of Statutes. State of Minnesota. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  24. ↑ "Chapter 70 – S.F. No. 10, Article 4, Section 56 (2023 Session Law, Amendments)". Minnesota Legislature — Revisor of Statutes. State of Minnesota. 2023. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  25. ↑ "Missouri Revised Statutes § 188.030 – Abortions; live birth after abortion; life‑preserving procedures; obligations". Missouri Revisor of Statutes. State of Missouri. October 14, 2017. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  26. ↑ "HB 1119 – Creates the Born‑Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act". Missouri Senate. February 2, 2025. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  27. ↑ Spoerre, Anna (2025-03-27). "Missouri 'born alive' bill creating legal action for medication abortions heads to Senate". Missouri Independent. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  28. ↑ "HB 625 – Infant Safety and Care Act (2023), House Bill No. 625". Montana Legislature — Legislative Archive. 2023. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  29. ↑ "Montana Legislative Referendum 131 Election Results: Born-Alive Infants Regulation". The New York Times. 2022-11-08. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  30. ↑ Larson, Keely (2023-05-05). "Montana Passes Significant Health Policy Changes in Controversial Session". KFF Health News. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  31. ↑ "New York Public Health Law § 4164". Justia Law. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  32. ↑ "Senate Bill S240 – Reproductive Health Act (2019)". New York State Senate. 2019. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  33. ↑ "Senate Bill 20 – Health Care Law Revisions (2023)" (PDF). North Carolina General Assembly. 2023. p. 24. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  34. ↑ "Senate Bill 359 – Born‑Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (2019)" (PDF). North Carolina General Assembly. 2019. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  35. ↑ Hanna, Jason (2019-04-18). "North Carolina governor vetoes 'born alive' abortion bill". CNN. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  36. ↑ "'Born-alive' abortion measure clears N. Carolina Senate". AP News. 2021-05-12. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  37. ↑ Kelly, Kate (May 16, 2023). "North Carolina Legislature Reapproves Abortion Ban, Overriding Governor's Veto". The New York Times. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  38. ↑ "Senate Bill 157 (134th General Assembly) – Born‑Alive Reporting and Penalties Act" (PDF). Ohio General Assembly. 2021. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  39. ↑ Mizelle, Shawna (2021-12-23). "Ohio GOP governor signs abortion bill into law | CNN Politics". CNN. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  40. ↑ "63 Oklahoma Statute § 1-734 Live-born fetus - Care and treatment". Justia Law. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  41. ↑ "Title 18 Chapter 32 "Abortion Control Act"". Pennsylvania General Assembly. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  42. ↑ "Doctor Is Convicted In Death of a Fetus After an Abortion". The New York Times. June 13, 1989. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  43. ↑ "House Bill 1051 (2021) – Maintain the Life of Any Child Born Alive". South Dakota Legislature. 2021. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  44. ↑ "Governor Noem Signs Born-Alive Legislation". news.sd.gov. February 24, 2021. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  45. ↑ Gryboski, Michael (February 25, 2021). "South Dakota passes law requiring doctors to help babies born alive after abortion". The Christian Post. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  46. ↑ "H.B. 16 – Born‑Alive Civil Cause of Action Act (86th Legislature, 2019)". Texas Legislature. 2019. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  47. ↑ "Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapter 171 – Abortion". Texas Statutes. 2003. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  48. ↑ Sundaram, Arya (April 17, 2019). "Texas House approves "born alive" abortion bill". The Texas Tribune. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  49. ↑ "Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, H.B. 4007 (2020 Regular Session)". West Virginia Legislature. March 7, 2020. Retrieved August 7, 2025.
  50. ↑ "West Virginia Senate passes 'born alive' abortion bill". PBS News. 2020-02-10. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  51. ↑ "Gov. Justice signs Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act". governorjustice.wv.gov. March 2, 2020. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  52. ↑ "AB 179 (2019) – Requirements for Children Born Alive following Abortion or Attempted Abortion". Wisconsin Legislature. 2019. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  53. ↑ "SB 16 (2021) – Requirements for Children Born Alive following Abortion or Attempted Abortion". Wisconsin Legislature. 2021. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  54. ↑ "AB 63 (2023) – Requirements for Children Born Alive following Abortion or Attempted Abortion". Wisconsin Legislature. 2023. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  55. ↑ "AB 382 (2025) – Requirements for Children Born Alive following Abortion or Attempted Abortion". Wisconsin State Legislature. 2025. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  56. ↑ "Wisconsin Assembly approves 'born alive' anti-abortion bill". AP News. 2019-05-15. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  57. ↑ White, Laurel (2021-09-09). "Wisconsin Republicans Reintroduce 'Born Alive' Abortion Bill". Wisconsin Public Radio. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  58. ↑ "WI Reps Reintroduce Born Alive Bill". Wisconsin Family Council. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  59. ↑ Stracqualursi, Veronica (2019-05-22). "Wisconsin Democratic governor says he'll veto Republican bills aimed at restricting abortion | CNN Politics". CNN. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  60. ↑ "Wisconsin's Democratic governor vetoes GOP abortion bills". PBS News. 2021-12-03. Retrieved 2025-08-07.
  61. ↑ 129 Cal. Rptr. 498 (Ct. App. 1976).
  62. ↑ James Cleary & Joseph Cox. "A Brief Overview of Minnesota's DWI Laws: Minnesota Statutes Chapter 169A and Related Laws" (PDF). Minnesota Impaired Driving Facts Report. Minnesota Department of Public Safety. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-09-26. Retrieved 2012-01-06.