By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
Illinois gun owners are celebrating a small but significant victory in a case challenging the requirement for a Firearm Owner Identification Card for guns kept in the home.
In a case known as State of Illinois v. Vivian Claudine Brown, which was financed by the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association, White County Resident Circuit Judge T. Scott Webb observed, “The Defendant’s possession of a .22 caliber rifle within the confines of her home, even without a valid FOID card falls squarely within the protections afforded her by the Second Amendment.”
According to WTVO News, Judge Webb added, “the Court finds that any fee associated with exercising the core fundamental Constitutional right of armed self-defense within the confines of one’s home violates the Second Amendment.”
Attorney Bill Kirk, president of Washington Gun Law, went on YouTube to explain, “This is a limited ruling, one that’s obviously going to be appealed, so we’re a long way from getting out of the woods, yet. But this is a huge ruling, it’s a fantastic opinion.”
Judge Webb’s 15-page opinion notes there is “no historical analogue” to the FOID Card Act, which was passed by the Illinois Legislature in 1967. Furthermore, several, pages into the opinion, the judge literally dismantles the FOID Card Act.
“No one has a right to possess firearms in the State of Illinois unless and until they obtain a license a first,” Judge Webb observes. “Everyone in the State is prohibited from possessing a firearm irrespective of their criminal background. Secondly, the underlying theme of those laws was the notion that the disarmed people were dangerous in some manner. While that might be theory behind the FOID Act, that is not the reality. Instead, the FOID Act makes it illegal for everyone to possess a firearm unless they obtain a requisite license. Unfortunately, and to the utter dismay of this Court, the actual reality is that all citizens of the State of Illinois are presumed dangerous, and the burden is on the applicant to prove otherwise. Moreover, none of the laws cited by the State as being historically similar sought to disarm otherwise law-abiding citizens within the confines of their own homes. That is the essence of the FOID Act when the superficial layers of the Act are peeled away.”
The defendant, Vivian Claudine Brown, kept a .22-caliber rifle in her home for personal protection. The gun never left the house.
“If an intruder had entered Ms. Brown’s home,” Judge Webb added, “and threatened violence towards her and, God forbid, she was forced to use that .22 rifle to defend herself, she would have committed a class A misdemeanor carrying with it a possible penalty of up to 364 days in the county jail. She could claim self-defense, but that does not change the fact that she possessed a firearm without a valid FOID Card. Such an outcome is asinine especially in this great nation that so cherishes the right to be secure and defend oneself within the home.”
The case has gone up the judicial ladder in Illinois twice before, all the way to the state Supreme Court. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb expects it to make a third trip to the state high court.
“This is an important ruling in a case that has been up and down the Illinois judicial ladder a couple of times already,” Gottlieb noted. “We expect the state to appeal again, which could put the case right back before the Illinois Supreme Court for the third time, and we are confident we will win. It’s hard to see how the Illinois Supreme Court avoids the constitutional issue, as they have done on the previous two visits.”
“Today’s decision reflects a correct application of Supreme Court precedent to unconstitutional restrictions on the rights to keep and bear arms,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Illinois’ FOID card poses an untenable barrier to the exercise of Second Amendment rights in one’s home as the court correctly identified. Determining the FOID card to be an unconstitutional obstacle to firearms ownership and possession in one’s home was the only logical result.”
