California only has Concussion mandates for school sponsored sports.

The law clearly states that it "does not create any additional liability". In other words, it is intended as additional protection for the youth athlete, not additional responsibility for the officials. If an official recognizes symptoms of concussion, he can act. If he does not (or merely chooses not to act) there is no additional liability than would have otherwise been there under existing law. The law does mandate concussion training for all coaches and officials, and that the training be repeated periodically (every three years, I think...).

The MN law applies to "any municipality, business, or nonprofit organization that organizes a youth athletic activity for which an activity fee is charged" as well as to schools.

To start, the law can state whatever, it cannot prevent legal action against anyone.

As an umpire, I am not medically trained nor an agent of the state and as such accept zero responsibility for the care of a minor when there are legal guardians and/or adults whom have entrusted with the responsibility for the well-being of that child.

I'm sure many will consider my statement as callous. I consider it being a responsible adult who expects other adults to acknowledge and act accordingly as it pertains to their accepted responsibilities.

I agree with most of your perspective. I was just explaining the MN law, which in reality merely set into law what was essentially the policy of the MSHSL already. The legislature just expanded it to non-school entities regardless of what the sanctioning body may have in their policies and rules.

Personally, I thought the legislature was doing what they do best: meddling into things they know nothing about with "feel good" laws so that can claim to be "taking action."

So, now I have to produce an up-to-date certificate showing that I attended concussion protocol training in order to register as an umpire with ASA.

So far (several years into this) no one has been sued and I have asked no one to leave a game due to concussion symptoms.

Did we ever reach a consensus on the OP question? :confused:

I'm not worried about sitting a player. I'm more concerned with not sitting a player because the one/two adults there (umpires) that have the least amount of available time to observe a particular player did not see enough to make a determination of a player who is later determined to have had a problem.

I agree, the politicians are sticking their nose where it doesn't belong just so they can fluff up a resume for the next election.

IMO, it was none of the umpire's business. As a concerned adult, I may have stopped the game and sought out a tournament/league director to get assistance for the player in distress if the coach and/or parent would not take action.