On Friday, Federal District Court Judge Stephen P. McGlynn handed down a ruling striking down Illinois’ Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA) as unconstitutional.
Today, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Federal District Court Judge Stephen P. McGlynn has ruled in the FPC Law case of Harrel v. Raoul that the Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA), which bans semi-automatic firearms and their magazines, is unconstitutional. The 168-page decision, which followed a full bench trial, can be viewed at firearmspolicy.org/harrel.
The PICA act was struck down on Second Amendment grounds, making this yet another case that bolsters the individual right to keep and bear arms:
After considering all of the evidence and arguments, the “Court must take action as justice demands,” the Court said in its decision. “PICA is an unconstitutional affront to the Second Amendment and must be enjoined. The Government may not deprive law-abiding citizens of their guaranteed right to self-defense as a means of offense.” However, the Court also stayed the injunction for 30 days to allow the State time to appeal and seek a stay from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
While it’s unclear what the Seventh Circuit might do, this is a case of “so far, so good.”
The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) stated:
“We are gratified that the Court properly found that these bans violate the constitutionally protected rights of Illinois residents and visitors. As we clearly showed at trial, PICA fails even under the Seventh Circuit’s misguided test that conflicts with binding Supreme Court precedent,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “We will continue to fight forward until we eliminate every unconstitutional ban like this throughout the country. Further, we are optimistic that the Supreme Court will soon address bans like these in our Snope v. Brown case out of Maryland, which is pending the Court’s decision on our petition for certiorari. Gun owners across the United States should be confident that the ultimate victory on these issues is coming, likely soon.”
Not to rain on the FPC’s well-deserved parade here, but there won’t be any ultimate victory. Like every contest in the political sphere, like any contest of government vs. liberty and property, this battle will never end. It will move from one arena to another, from one issue to another, forever. In the ’60s, the hot issue for gun-grabbers was handguns. Now it’s “assault weapons.” Next year, it may be handguns again — or the gun-banners may start shouting about “sniper rifles,” and everyone’s scoped hunting rifles will be targeted.
The hoplophobes will never give up, so the Second Amendment advocates must likewise be in this for the long haul.
See Related: Dumbest Idea Ever: Biden Again Stumping for ‘Assault Weapon,’ Bump-Stock Ban in New Ad
The Centennial State’s Leftward Drift Continues: Colorado House Passes ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban
The conclusion of the ruling by Judge McGlynn states in part:
Most importantly, considering all of the evidence presented, the Court holds that the provisions of PICA criminalizing the knowing possession of specific semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, magazines, and attachments are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.
That is an unambiguous win for the Second Amendment and a reaffirmation of the individual right to keep and bear arms.
As noted above, this will likely be appealed to the Seventh Circuit. As always, we will continue to watch this case and bring you updates as events warrant.
