Appeals judge questions ‘uphill battle’ for IL gun ban found unconstitutional
(The Center Square) – A three judge panel in a federal appeals took the challenge to Illinois’ gun and magazine ban under advisement after hearing arguments Monday.
Southern District of Illinois Judge Stephen McGlynn found the law unconstitutional last year on final judgement. Monday, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals heard oral arguments. Judge Michael Brennan praised McGlynn’s opinion’s thoroughness
“I think this is the first time we’ve had a full trial record of any federal appellate court in the country, set a full trial record,” Brennan said. “Isn’t that an uphill battle for the state to overcome those findings?”
Brennan sided with plaintiffs when the case was in front of the appeals court in 2023.
Judge Frank Easterbrook, who joined now retired Judge Diane Wood in siding with the state on preliminary grounds last year, said the district court didn’t address the rate of fire and capacity of magazines as the appeals court had directed.
“I really worry about the blah blah blah, etc. etc. given that the district court didn’t make findings on several of the things we told it, it needed to,” Easterbrook said Monday.
The state, working to defend the law, said there are unprecedented societal concerns of mass shootings. Brennan questioned that.
“If it’s a mass shooting circumstance, I’m not sure. We can’t be myopic in our history with regard to when these, these, mass shootings occurred,” Brennan said. “It’s not just recent. It’s going back.”
Judge Amy St Eve asked challenging questions of both plaintiffs and defendants.
Speaking for plaintiffs challenging the law, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said Illinois’ law is at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court.
“The United States has a strong interest in ensuring that the Second Amendment is not relegated to a second class right, and that all the law-abiding citizens of the circuit remain able to enjoy the full exercise of their Second Amendment rights,” Dhillon said.
It’s unclear when the appeals panel would rule on the case. Either way the three-judge panel goes, the case is expected to go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Latest News Stories
Head Football Coach Resigns as Board Approves Personnel Changes
Google to pay $68M to end Assistant recordings class action
Dems fail in first try to use ‘state sovereignty’ to ‘veto’ ICE
Report says California’s bond debt load exceeds $99 billion
Los Angeles mayor calls for unity, blasts ICE in State of City
Illinois Quick Hits: McIntyre back as inspector general for DCFS
Speculation on Seahawks’ sale heats up following proposed WA ‘jock tax’
WATCH: Newsom cites California’s seizures of fentanyl
Colorado bill says gun barrel purchases to be made at dealers
Trump admin to define banking privacy laws
Western senators propose wastewater program renewal
Ohio Dems call for return to TPS status for Haitians