By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
Another gun rights organization has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review of their challenge of the ban on so-called “assault weapons” in Illinois under the Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA), according to Fox News.
The Second Amendment Foundation and its partners—the Illinois State Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., C4 Gun Store, LLC, Marengo Guns, Inc., and a private citizen, Dane Harrel—filed a similar petition in mid-February. They are also challenging the gun ban in a case known as Harrel v. Raoul.
The Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation filed the latest petition.
Indeed, there are quite a few individuals and entities lined up against the Illinois ban. The list includes Hood’s Guns & More, Pro Gun & Indoor Range, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc., Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, Guns Save Life, Law Weapons, Inc., the National Association for Gun Rights, and several private citizens are also involved in the various challenges.
As noted by the Fox report, federal District Judge Stephen Patrick McGlynn, a Donald Trump appointee in the Southern District of Illinois had ruled for plaintiffs in the case, but the Seventh Circuit Court overturned McGlynn back in May 2023 and the law took effect two months ago, on Jan. 10.
The gun ban law was signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker.
“Clearly,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb in February, “the Illinois gun and magazine bans are unconstitutional under principles set down in the 2008 Heller ruling and the 2022 Bruen decision. In both of those opinions, the high court said the Second Amendment protects firearms in common use. It is indisputable that modern semiautomatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten cartridges are in common use by tens of millions of U.S. citizens, so such a ban is, in the court’s own words, ‘off the table.’”
“The questions here are simple and straightforward,” explained SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Does the U.S. Constitution allow the government to prohibit law-abiding, responsible, peaceable citizens from protecting themselves, their families and homes with semiautomatic firearms that are in common use? Does the same Constitution allow the government to prohibit those same citizens from using commonly-owned magazines for such protective purposes? Pending similar actions in other jurisdictions make it paramount that the Supreme Court accept this case for review, as the lower courts continue to ignore the Court’s edict.”
