Federal judge rules Illinois assault weapons ban unconstitutional

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I don't want to search for an original thread and take the chance of being 'timed out' again. So, if there is one, perhaps the moderators, when they come back, will combine the threads if it's felt necessary.

Federal judge rules Illinois assault weapons ban unconstitutional

...U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn, who sits on the federal court in East Saint Louis, wrote in his 168-page opinion that the statewide ban on assault-style weapons violates the Second Amendment...

As part of his ruling that the assault weapons ban is unconstitutional, McGlynn issued a permanent injunction prohibiting enforcement of the ban, but he stayed that injunction for 30 days to give the state time to file an appeal...

"What is particularly disturbing is that the prohibition of weapons that are commonly owned and used by citizens are now banned, depriving citizens of a principal means to defend themselves and their property in situations where a handgun or shotgun alone would not be the citizen's preferred arm," McGlynn wrote. "Sadly, there are those who seek to usher in a sort of post-Constitution era where the citizens' individual rights are only as important as they are convenient to a ruling class."

McGlynn compared the use of firearms for self-defense to equipping vehicles with airbags, ocean liners with lifeboats, or houses with storm shelters.

"Why do we protect ourselves with firearms? In life, we face many perils," He wrote. "Too often, the perils we face are forced upon us by other people. By people who are negligent, reckless, insane, impaired, or evil. Sometimes it is the proverbial lone wolf; sometimes, it is the whole wolf pack. Truly, life comes at you quickly. And who comes to our aid in times of peril? Sometimes, it is the police or first responders; other times it is healthcare professionals; and sometimes it is family, friends, or neighbors. Sometimes, it is no one."...

The opinion can be found by clicking - Here.

[OlderThanDirt]

Winning!

[Sgt Raven]

There is a 6 page thread here.

https://www.calguns.net/forum/politics-litigation-and-activism/national-2nd-amend-political-legal-discussion/1819605-il-goa-vs-raoul-7th-circuit-upholds-illinois-assault-weapons-ban

[splithoof]

How many more years will this continue to be enforced while the appellate industry milks it for every billable hour it can draw?

[TruOil]

How many more years will this continue to be enforced while the appellate industry milks it for every billable hour it can draw?

At present, the trial court judge's opinion and ruling have been implicitly overruled by the 7th Circuit's decision upholding the ban. But since the 7th Circuit decision is a final order, the next step is seeking review by the Supreme Court. There is a good chance that the Supreme Court will grant review in Snopes v. Maryland (in which the briefing on the cert petition was recently completed), which raises a nearly identical issue. If that happens, the Illinois decision will likely be taken on a grant and hold pending Snopes. If Snopes is reversed (which has already been before the court once already with instructions to reconsider in light of Bruen), then all the other assault weapons bans that reach the court prior to the decision will get the same treatment--grant, reverse, and remand with instructions to reconsider. So a decision by next June I would hope.

[Sgt Raven]

At present, the trial court judge's opinion and ruling have been implicitly overruled by the 7th Circuit's decision upholding the ban. But since the 7th Circuit decision is a final order, the next step is seeking review by the Supreme Court. There is a good chance that the Supreme Court will grant review in Snopes v. Maryland (in which the briefing on the cert petition was recently completed), which raises a nearly identical issue. If that happens, the Illinois decision will likely be taken on a grant and hold pending Snopes. If Snopes is reversed (which has already been before the court once already with instructions to reconsider in light of Bruen), then all the other assault weapons bans that reach the court prior to the decision will get the same treatment--grant, reverse, and remand with instructions to reconsider. So a decision by next June I would hope.

The 7th Circuit decision was on a Preliminary Injunction and it was sent back down to the District Court. Judge McGlynn incorporated the 7th's decision in his decision against the State.

[splithoof]

Meanwhile out in the real world, people who have been living under this carnival tent of judicial circus clowns grow old and die off. These laws are dreamed up, proposed, passed into law, enacted and enforced in a matter of months, while those who are getting anal raped by said laws endure the pounding for decades.

[Batman]

I'm waiting for the USSC to actually rule that there's no such thing as a semi-auto assault weapon, that magazine bans are arbitrary, and that Rosters and other tests aren't allowed at state level, only federal under the auspices of product safety, not for purposes of defacto bans, rather than the usual GVR where it goes back to wither again hoping that the courts trying to take those rights aren't playing musical coffins/retirements for USSC justices and they get a more sympathetic court.


Ok course, I doubt that will ever happen.