Illinois Supreme Court upholds ‘assault weapons’ ban in close vote.

The Illinois Supreme Court Upholds “Assault Weapons” Ban, Protecting​ Illinois Communities

The Illinois Supreme Court has delivered ⁣a significant blow to Republican lawmakers and gun rights advocates by ruling that ⁣the state’s “assault ⁣weapons” ban is ⁤constitutional. The court’s decision affirms the constitutionality of the Protect Illinois ‌Communities Act, which prohibits‍ the sale of specific types of rifles, handguns, attachments, and rapid-firing devices.

Challenging the Ban

Illinois Republican lawmakers,⁣ led by state Rep. Dan Caulkins, and gun owners had filed ‍a complaint arguing that the ban on semiautomatic‍ weapons violated their Second Amendment rights and the Constitution’s right to equal protection under the law.‍ They also claimed that​ the ban constituted “special legislation” ​in ⁤violation of ⁢the state constitution.

However, four of the state high⁣ court’s Democratic justices ruled in favor of the ‌state, while two ‌Republican justices dissented. Justice Mary Kay O’Brien, a Democrat, wrote a‍ separate dissenting opinion.

The Majority Opinion

Justice Elizabeth Rochford, writing for the majority, stated that the plaintiffs attempted to combine their equal protection claims with a Second Amendment challenge. ⁢She ⁢argued that the plaintiffs had waived any Second Amendment challenge in their appeal, as it was ⁣not raised in the circuit court.

Rochford⁢ emphasized that ‍the law’s impact on the right ‌to bear arms depended on whether⁢ the restricted firearms were commonly ⁢used for self-defense and whether the regulations ⁣aligned with the nation’s historical traditions. However,⁢ she noted that the record lacked evidence on these matters, as ​the plaintiffs had not raised them ‌in the circuit court.

Equal Protection Arguments

Attorney ‌Jerry Stocks, representing the plaintiffs, contended that the law was not being applied equally, as‍ “grandfathered” gun owners were allowed to⁣ keep their now-restricted firearms ⁢while others were prohibited from purchasing‍ them. Rochford countered ⁤this argument ⁤by stating​ that the act allowed plaintiffs to retain⁤ their restricted items but⁤ not acquire more. Therefore, those⁢ who did not ⁣own‍ any⁢ of the restricted items⁣ could⁢ not claim equal protection ‌violations.

Implications and Reactions

This ruling marks a⁢ significant victory for the state of Illinois in defending its​ “assault weapon” ban. While the​ law’s fate is still pending in a federal ​appellate court, the Supreme Court’s decision allows‍ the ban to remain in place for now.

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, a Democrat, expressed his satisfaction with the court’s ruling, stating that the Protect Illinois Communities Act is⁢ a commonsense gun reform law aimed at ensuring⁢ the ‍safety of Illinoisans in all​ corners of the state.

Read ⁣more: The Washington Examiner