Federal Court Upholds Illinois' Assault Rifle Ban

A three judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a ban on the sale of assault style weapons, opining that other Constitutional amendments have limits under the law and that the Second Amendment is not an exception. The Protect Illinois Communities Act was passed earlier this year, signed by Governor J.B. Pritzger, and immediately challenged by the gun lobby. The case went before Trump-appointed Federal District Judge Stephen McGlynn who issued an injunction on the law, which the Seventh Circuit just overturned. From CBS News' report:

"The legislation banned dozens of specific brands or types of rifles and handguns, .50-caliber guns, attachments and rapid-firing devices. No rifle will be allowed to accommodate more than 10 rounds, with a 15-round limit for handguns."

The law would also require current owners of such weapons to register with the State. In their ruling, the panel wrote:

"[A]s we know from long experience with other fundamental rights, such as the right to free speech, the right peaceably to assemble, the right to vote, and the right to free exercise of religion, even the most important personal freedoms have their limits. Government may punish a deliberately false fire alarm; it may condition free assembly on the issuance of a permit; it may require voters to present a valid identification card; and it may punish child abuse even if it is done in the name of religion. [snip]

Everyone can agree that a personal handgun, used for self-defense, is one of those Arms that law-abiding citizens must be free to 'keep and bear.' Everyone can also agree, we hope, that a nuclear weapon such as the now-retired M388 Davy Crockett system, with its 51-pound W54 warhead, can be reserved for the military, even though it is light enough for one person to carry. Many weapons, however, lie between these extremes."  (our emphasis)

The gun lobby will appeal this decision to the Republican / Shooters party-dominated Supreme Court, where the decision will likely be in their favor. Nevertheless, it represents an important ruling from a Federal Appeals Court that clearly stated that the Second Amendment should have its bounds, and they need to be written and enforced.

(Image: J.J. Gouin / Shutterstock)