Last week, a district court handed Illinois a major defeat on the right to keep and bear arms. The state restricts, among other things, magazine capacity. The district court said that such a restriction is unconstitutional.
It's not, of course, but no one should be shocked to see Illinois say otherwise. It's not like the state would admit to being unconstitutional, which is probably why it did what I thought it'd do the whole time and appeal the court's decision:
Attorneys for the state of Illinois filed a notice of appeal with the federal district court that found the state’s gun and magazine ban violates the U.S. Constitution.
Illinois banned the sale and possession of more than 170 semi-automatic firearms and magazines over certain capacities in January 2023. Consolidated cases challenging the ban were heard during a bench trial in East St. Louis in September.
Southern District of Illinois federal Judge Stephen McGlynn said in his ruling Friday, the ban is “an affront to the Second Amendment and must be enjoined.”
He issued a permanent injunction against the law but held that from taking effect for 30 days.
Dan Eldridge with Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, one of the plaintiffs groups in the consolidated case, said all eyes are now on how the appeals court reacts.
“And right now the existing panel is split 50-50,” Eldridge told The Center Square.
The previous appeals court panel that handled the preliminary injunction McGlynn issued in this case in April 2023 was split 2-1 in saying the state had a likelihood of advancing on the merits.
One of the appeals judges in the majority on the previous panel, Diane Wood, has retired since their preliminary ruling in November 2023. It’s unclear with the case now decided on final judgment in the district court if there will be an entirely new panel or if another appeals judge would be assigned to the existing panel of Easterbrook and Judge Michael Brennan.
“Also, Judge [Frank] Easterbrook left open the door for being convinced that an AR-15 is not the same thing as an M4 or an M16,” Eldrige said. “And I think we did that and I think Judge McGlynn made a powerful, a powerful argument that that’s a nonsensical standard.”
If Illinois loses in the Seventh Circuit, it will be devastating, and the state will have to weigh a couple of things if it wants to take the case further.
A circuit court ruling would kill the law. There's no way around that, but circuit court rulings generally don't apply across the nation, just in that circuit. That's important because that's as far as it goes if the state takes the loss and calls it a day.
If Illinois opts to take it to the Supreme Court instead, it could easily find magazine restrictions overturned across the nation, much like how Bruen struck down "may issue" laws for concealed carry permits. Of course, if the Court rules in its favor, future challenges will be problematic for gun rights advocates.
Of course, while the Supreme Court isn't as great as I'd like it to be on guns, the truth is that it's unlikely to find any real historical analog to magazine restrictions. The Court is unlikely to agree with Illinois about its magazine limit law.
That would kill similar laws everywhere.
That's good for gun rights advocates, but not so great for states like Illinois which seems to take guidance from New York or California.
Here's hoping Illinois keeps it up and keeps losing along the way.
