OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
The U.S. Supreme Court has again declined to overturn the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines enacted by the state of Illinois.
To prevent the bans’ enforcement, a gun rights organization and a gun shop owner petitioned the Supreme Court for an emergency ruling, claiming that the restrictions violate their right to bear arms. The plaintiffs had a comparable request that was denied in the spring.
The high court once again denied their request in a short decision that did not include any dissenting opinions. Although the matter may end up back before the justices, the decision keeps the laws in place for the time being.
The Democratic-controlled state of Illinois enacted stricter gun control laws in the wake of a mass shooting that occurred during a Fourth of July celebration in Highland Park, killing seven and injuring scores more, The Hill noted.
The ban, signed by Democratic Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker in January, includes penalties for any individual who “carries or possesses… manufactures, sells, delivers, imports, or purchases any assault weapon or .50 caliber rifle.”
It also includes statutory penalties for anyone who “sells, manufactures, delivers, imports, possesses, or purchases any assault weapon attachment or .50 caliber cartridge.”
Any kit or tools used to increase the fire rate of a semiautomatic weapon are also included in the ban, and the law includes a limit for purchases of certain magazines. After Thursday’s ruling, the law will stay in place while it’s litigated in the lower courts.
The Law Weapons and Supply firearm store owned by Robert Bevis, the National Association for Gun Rights, and the National Association for Gun Rights are claiming that these laws violate the Supreme Court’s new standard for determining whether or not something violates the Second Amendment.
“A right delayed is a right denied, and every day these gun bans are enforced is a travesty to freedom. 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,” Dudley Brown, the group’s president, said.
Last year, the six conservative justices who made up the Supreme Court announced a historic ruling: stricter gun control laws must be in line with the longstanding American practice of regulating firearms.
In February, a federal district judge made a preliminary ruling in which he or she decided not to block the state law or the city ordinance.
A three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision last month. The plaintiffs subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court to halt the implementation of the new laws pending the outcome of their appeal.
“In summary, the Seventh Circuit’s decision was manifestly erroneous,” the plaintiffs wrote 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 response, Illinois argued in court documents that the plaintiffs failed to meet the stringent standards set by the Supreme Court for emergency relief.
The state wrote that the Court should deny the applicant’s request, which no other plaintiff in the six cases consolidated below made, for essentially the same reasons.
After last year’s historic expansion of Second Amendment rights, the Supreme Court has turned down numerous emergency petitions to halt gun control measures.
As part of their regular agenda, the justices are now considering a case that challenges a federal statute that makes it illegal for individuals subjected to restraining orders to possess firearms. By the end of June, the court is expected to have decided that case, which could shed light on the court’s test.
