Illinois governments defend gun ban because of ‘unprecedented societal concerns’

(The Center Square) – With the first round of briefs in the challenge to Illinois’ gun and magazine ban in front of the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal, plaintiffs are preparing their filings.

Illinois banned more than 170 semi-automatic firearms and magazines over certain capacities on Jan. 10. There were already bans in Cook County and the city of Chicago.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has the consolidated docket of cases from the Southern District and Northern District federal courts where plaintiffs are challenging bans on semi-automatic firearms and magazines over certain capacities.

The lower courts were mixed with a preliminary injunction from the Southern District stayed and Northern District judges siding with the state and local governments.

The briefs for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in the expedited appeal from Cook County, the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois argue the banned weapons pose “extraordinary risks to law enforcement,” are “not commonly used for self-defense,” and that “weapons in common use for criminal purposes may be regulated.”

With the plaintiffs group, Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson responded.

“That isn’t true. They’re only used in like 1 or 2% of the crimes, like 1.4% of crimes use an AR-15, or something like that, so that is not true either,” Pearson told The Center Square Tuesday. “So this is a propaganda piece. This isn’t really a reply brief.”

The governments also argue the law and ordinances are justified because of “unprecedented societal concerns” and “dramatic technological changes” making the banned firearms “dangerous and unusual.”

Pearson said governments can’t balance public interest with the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

“Any government can take anybody’s constitutional rights if that were the case,” he said. “The other thing is that in [the precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association vs. Bruen], there is no balance. It’s either constitutional or it’s not. So the balance argument goes out the window also.”

The plaintiffs are set to file their briefs by June 19. Reply briefs are due June 23. The case will be heard June 29.

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *