Supreme Court Refuses To Block Blue State Assault Weapons Ban
The U.S. Supreme Court has once again refused to block Illinois’ ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.
A gun rights group and a firearms retailer had sought an emergency intervention from the Supreme Court, arguing that the restrictions infringed upon their constitutional right to bear arms. However, the justices turned down the plaintiffs’ request, offering no written dissents.
The court issued a brief order reaffirming its decision to allow the state laws to remain in effect, at least for the time being. Although it is possible the issue could return to the Court in the future, the laws will continue to be enforced for now.
In response to a tragic mass shooting during a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park—which left seven dead and many more injured—Illinois’ Democratic-led legislature passed tighter gun control measures.
The legislation, signed by Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker in January, imposes penalties on individuals who “carry or possess… manufactures, sells, delivers, imports, or purchases any assault weapon or .50 caliber rifle.”
Additionally, the law includes punishments for those who “sell, manufacture, deliver, import, possess, or purchase any assault weapon attachment or .50 caliber cartridge.”
The statute also outlaws kits and devices intended to boost the firing rate of semi-automatic weapons, and it imposes limits on the sale of certain magazines. After Thursday’s Supreme Court decision, the lower courts will continue to handle the ongoing litigation surrounding the law.
Robert Bevis, owner of the Law Weapons and Supply gun store, along with the National Association for Gun Rights, has been challenging the law, asserting that it fails to meet the Supreme Court’s clarified standards for evaluating Second Amendment cases.
“Delaying a right results in its denial, and enforcing these gun bans every day is an affront to freedom.” Dudley Brown, president of the National Association for Gun Rights, stated. “We will be back to the Supreme Court as soon as our legal team finishes drafting our cert petition, and they will have to decide if they meant what they said in Heller and Bruen.”
In a landmark ruling last year, the Court’s six conservative justices declared that any modern gun regulations must align with the nation’s historical traditions regarding firearm control.
Earlier this year, a federal district judge declined to block either the state’s law or the corresponding city ordinance in a preliminary decision.
In September, a three-judge panel from the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s ruling. The challengers then appealed to the Supreme Court to pause enforcement of the new regulations while their case moved forward.
“In summary, the Seventh Circuit’s decision was manifestly erroneous,” the plaintiffs asserted in court filings. “In the meantime, plaintiffs and hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Illinois citizens are suffering irreparable injury because their fundamental right to keep and bear arms is being infringed.”
In its counterarguments, Illinois contended that the plaintiffs did not meet the Supreme Court’s demanding criteria for obtaining emergency relief.
The state maintained that the Court should reject the request—something no other plaintiff in the six consolidated cases below had pursued—citing the same grounds.
Following its expansion of Second Amendment protections last year, the Supreme Court has consistently declined a series of emergency appeals attempting to block various gun control laws.
Separately, the justices are reviewing a case challenging a federal law that bars individuals under restraining orders from owning firearms. A decision is expected by late June, which could provide further clarification on the Court’s standards for evaluating gun regulations.