A federal judge on Friday put a stop to the state of Illinois’ controversial “assault weapon” ban, citing the likelihood that the ban would be found unconstitutional due to its infringement on Second Amendment rights. Judge Stephen McGlynn of the Southern District of Illinois, a Trump appointee, ruled that the Protect Illinois Communities Act cannot be enforced until a final decision is made regarding the constitutionality of the law, as reported by WGN-TV.
In his ruling, McGlynn referred to the Highland Park shooting, which prompted the enactment of PICA, resulting in seven deaths and 48 injuries during a Fourth of July event last year. He questioned whether the criminal actions of a few individuals could justify infringing on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens, concluding that the answer was “likely no.”
McGlynn’s decision aligns with the 2022 Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which overturned restrictions on gun rights in New York. He emphasized that the Supreme Court has consistently held that citizens have a constitutional right to own, possess, and use firearms for self-defense. The judge pointed out that PICA appears to have been written in direct contradiction to the clear directives in Bruen and the landmark 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, which reaffirmed individuals’ right to own guns.
In his ruling, McGlynn wrote, “No state may enact a law that denies its citizens rights that the Constitution guarantees them. Even legislation that may enjoy the support of a majority of its citizens must fail if it violates the constitutional rights of fellow citizens.”
Furthermore, the judge rejected Illinois’ argument that semiautomatic weapons could be banned because they did not exist when the Second Amendment was written, noting that the Supreme Court has already dismantled this line of reasoning.
While acknowledging the damage caused by the unlawful use of firearms, McGlynn emphasized that the court must remain mindful of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. He criticized the legislature for not considering individual rights under the Second Amendment or Supreme Court precedent in drafting PICA, which he said not only regulated but restricted and, in some cases, obliterated the right to self-defense.
This ruling represents a victory for conservatives and Second Amendment advocates, who argue that law-abiding citizens should not be punished for the actions of criminals. It also serves as a reminder that the preservation of constitutional rights must remain at the forefront of legislative efforts, even when addressing complex and emotionally charged issues like gun control.
