A federal appeals court has upheld a controversial Illinois law that largely bans the sale and possession of semiautomatic firearms and large-capacity magazines. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit issued its decision on Thursday, reversing a district court ruling that had found the ban unconstitutional.
The law, known as the Protect Illinois Communities Act, restricts the manufacture, sale, delivery, purchase, and possession of "assault weapons" and large-capacity magazines. A grandfather clause allows individuals who lawfully owned these items before the ban to continue possessing them.
The Seventh Circuit panel focused its ruling on AR-15-style rifles and 30-round magazines, determining that the restrictions align with the historical tradition of firearm regulation in the United States. "Whether to adopt them is thus a decision reposed in our elected representatives, and we reverse," the majority opinion stated.
However, Chief Judge Michael Brennan dissented, arguing that the ban infringes upon Second Amendment rights. "Our Nation’s enduring traditions forbid governments from prohibiting firearms commonly owned for self-defense. Because the people have overwhelmingly chosen the AR-15 rifle and its magazine as their weapon of choice, they are protected by the Second Amendment," Brennan wrote. "Illinois’s ban goes too far and should be enjoined as unconstitutional. I respectfully dissent."
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, who signed the law in early 2023, praised the appeals court's decision. "BREAKING: The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Protect IL Communities Act. Illinois will continue banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines capable of inflicting mass casualties. A victory in the fight to end gun violence that helps keep our communities safe," Pritzker said in a post on X.
State Attorney General Kwame Raoul also expressed satisfaction with the ruling. "This is a win that enhances public safety in Illinois. We have seen the damage that assault weapons and large-capacity magazines can inflict, and these weapons of war have no place in our communities," Raoul stated. "My office has successfully defended the state’s prohibition on these weapons in both state and federal court, and I am immensely proud of the hardworking attorneys in my office who have worked diligently to preserve this critical public safety measure."
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), a plaintiff in the case, indicated its disapproval of the ruling. The organization stated its intention to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court.