A federal judge in Chicago has denied a request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the Illinois “assault weapons” ban and a similar ordinance in Naperville.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall on Friday deemed the bans on selling so-called “assault weapons” as “constitutionally sound.”
The decision is believed to be the first from a federal judge considering whether bans on black rifles meet the standards set by a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling authored by Justice Clarence Thomas last summer.
Lawyers representing the National Association for Gun Rights and Robert Bevis, a gun store owner in Naperville, had filed the lawsuit seeking to halt the bans and claimed that the new state gun law and a similar Naperville ordinance cannot meet the requirements set by the U.S. Supreme Court in the aforementioned landmark case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
In the SCOTUS ruling, restrictions on weapons must be limited to dangerous and unusual arms that aren’t commonly used.
They argued the ruling does not align with the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation,” and that the weapons banned by the Illinois law are “unquestionably” in common use.
SEE ALSO: Illinois Bans So-Called ‘Assault Weapons’
“An arm that is in common use for lawful purposes is, by definition, not unusual,” the lawyers wrote. “Such an arm therefore cannot be both dangerous and unusual and therefore cannot be subjected to a blanket ban.”
However, Judge Kendall disagreed and ruled in favor of the ban on selling “assault weapons,” stating that the bans are consistent with the SCOTUS ruling.
“Naperville and Illinois lawfully exercised their authority to control their possession, transfer, sale, and manufacture by enacting a ban on commercial sales,” the judge wrote.
Judge Kendall ruled that the government does have the authority to regulate highly dangerous arms, including “assault weapons” and “large-capacity” magazines, because she believes they do pose an unusual risk that can cause greater harm and more deaths.
“The text of the Second Amendment is limited to only certain arms, and history and tradition demonstrate that particularly ‘dangerous’ weapons are unprotected,” the judge wrote.
She also stated that while black rifles are commonly used for self-defense, gun owners still have other options to choose from for protection. According to the judge, the request to block the bans did not demonstrate a need due to irreparable harm to those suing.
“Bevis has not furnished any evidence that he will lose substantial sales, and he can still sell almost any other type of gun,” Kendall wrote. “While a high number of assault weapons are in circulation, only 5% of firearms are assault weapons.”
Kendall also ruled that the state and Naperville have made the more compelling argument for protecting the public interest.
SEE ALSO: Illinois Governor Implements Emergency ‘Clear and Present Danger’ Rule to Restrict Gun Ownership and Confiscate Firearms
“On the one hand, they suffer an alleged deprivation of a constitutional right,” the judge wrote. “Again, though, the financial burden and loss of access to effective firearms would be minimal. On the other side, Illinois and Naperville compellingly argue their laws protect public safety by removing particularly dangerous weapons from circulation.”
The plaintiffs first filed suit last year after Naperville passed its ban. Once Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) signed the statewide assault weapons ban into law, the plaintiffs amended their suit to add the state of Illinois.
The state law — which is temporarily paused in some parts of Illinois as a result of another lawsuit — bans the sale of “assault weapons” and caps magazines at 10 rounds for long guns and 15 for handguns. Earlier this month, a state court judge in southern Illinois blocked the black rifle ban against 865 gun owners and one firearms store owner who filed suit challenging the law.
It also bans the sale of rapid-fire devices known as “switches” because of their ability to turn firearms into fully automatic weapons.
Legal owners of banned guns will be protected by a grandfather clause if they register the firearms with the Illinois State Police by Jan. 1.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
Smart citizens do not comply with registrations. Smarter ones leave blue states as soon as possible.
Do I hear ‘We the People’ forming a Grand Jury? ‘We the People’ made the Constitution to keep the government in. Now they have spent all these years trying to convince us that the Constitution was made to keep ‘We the People’ in.
DO NOT REGISTER! Pritzker and his bought and paid for federal judge can piss off. That goes for his bribed, oath breaking State Police too.
Judge Needs to be Tarred and Feathered After being Disbarred. What a Complete Crock of the Crap She Wrote!
so they’ll let you have one if you agree to their hokey gun registration scheme. Seriously?
It is clear that the federal judge in the Illinois case installed self legislation from the bench. Thanks to the N.A.G.R for?standing up! they will not back down. Here in the West those same firearms are used all the time/ Hunting, shooting sports, and self defense.
It is note worthy this ruling is about mandatory registration of firearms.
Where are Springfield Armory and the other gun manufacturers during this fight!?!
So the dumbassacraps bought themselves another judge! It’s funny how the others found it unconstitutional and he finds to allow it! I wonder how much hog headed “prickter” had to bribe the sob?! I registered my firearms when I bought them! That’s all they’re gonna get! From my cold dead hands!
Chicago judge, what else would you expect….
Assault People ,
No weapon, can hurt anyone, every Gun needs a Operator, if it holds 1 to hundreds of rounds, it needs a Human to make it work, so Assault Person is what you are after, (one who assaults other people with guns..)
Assault People, also use Hammers, Knives, Base Ball Bats, Assault Fist, Feet , Pots Pans , Rolling Pins, 2x4s, Heavy Tools , Wire, Poisions, Cars, SUVs, Dyano – Might.and WORDS, to Assault People, and watch out for Col.Mustard in the Kitchen with a lead pipe.
VET WHO YOU VOTE FOR, or In Days gone by THINK, try it it works for most, if not for you, get a Psycohlogist or Local “Shrink”. and never trust a politian. they work for us ,or do they??????
“The text of the Second Amendment is limited to only certain arms, and history and tradition demonstrate that particularly ‘dangerous’ weapons are unprotected,” the judge wrote……. Excuse me! Where is that written in the second amendment . Judges are now making up words that are not in the constitution?
I wish these gun hating socialist judges would take definition of assault weapon and shove it right up there ass. They use the definition assault weapon to describe a long gun for one reason to eventually classifiy all semi auto long guns as assault weapons. If anyone in Illinois comply s with this unconstitutional law you are sheep and you are now living in Nazi Germany where Hitler confiscated all weapons. The only way to stop these judges is no one comply.
I wish these gun hating socialist judges would take definition of assault weapon and shove it right up there ass. They use the definition assault weapon to describe a long gun for one reason to eventually classifie all semi auto long guns as assault weapons. If anyone in Illinois comply s with this unconstitutional law you are sheep to the slaughter. The only way to stop these judges is no one comply.
Now that illinoise has the word assault weapon into law next comes the Illinois definition of Assault weapon which im sure will cover every semi automatic long gun on the market.
MTG has it right. This country needs a divorce.
Yes it does, but there has to be a city or county that has to be first and have the leadership and local population who will not back down.
A section of FOPA, the Firearms Owners Protection Act, prohibits any new gun registry by Federal, State, or Local governments. Requiring so-called “assault weapons” to be registered is in violation of Federal law.
Shame shame shame…She did the balancing test expressly prohibited by Bruen. The court cannot balance the public interest against the Second Amendment, as Bruen made achingly clear, repeating what it had held in Heller. This sill be overturned eventually. I seem to recall that the Seventh Circuit was much more supportive of gun rights than the liberal circuits. After all, it forced Illinois to enact shall issue CCW or see its CCW ban completely eliminated as unconstitutional. The Seventh was none too pleased with the great efforts the City of Chicago went through to try to keep shooting ranges out of city limits. So with the state courts correctly applying Bruen, I don’t think that this particular ruling will last.