Assault Weapons Ban Argued Before Illinois Supreme Court
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul speaks at an anti-gun rally in Springfield Tuesday. (Photo: State Journal-Register)
NOTE: This story was originally posted for subscribers only. To receive subscriber-only newsletters and content, click here.
If you didn’t think the Illinois Supreme Court was a political animal, arguments over Illinois’ controversial assault weapons ban Tuesday removed all doubt.
Justices heard the case brought by Rep. Dan Caulkins (R-Decatur) against Attorney General Kwame Raoul and Governor JB Pritzker arguing the assault weapons ban that was passed and signed on the same day in January violates the state constitution.
Caulkins’ suit argues the equal protection clause of the state constitution is violated because the law doesn’t apply to gun owners equally, mainly that assault weapon owners are allowed to keep their guns, but new assault weapons cannot be purchased in the state.
Assistant Attorney General Leigh Jahnig argued the gun owners and perspective gun owners do not need to be treated equally.
“The reason that this court has identified the similarly situated requirement as a threshold element of an equal protection claim is because the legislature is permitted to treat unlike groups differently under the statute,” Jahnig said.
Republican Justices Lisa Holder White and David Overstreet continually pushed Jahnig on the “fundamental right” gun owners have under the constitution.
Jerry Stocks, the attorney for Caulkins, repeatedly clashed with Chief Justice Mary Jane Theis over the grounds of the suit, as Theis alleged the case belonged in federal court because it is over the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, not the state constitution.
“There are unique attributes to this case that only our Illinois Supreme Court can rule upon and there are the Second Amendment values or principles that federal and state courts have concurrent jurisdiction,” Stocks said.
After the hearing, Attorney General Kwame Raouls aid he was “fairly confident” the law would be upheld.
“We’re trying to keep people safe. We’ve had people use these types of weapons to commit mass shootings,” Raoul said. “There’s a rational basis to say ‘we don’t want the proliferation of assault weapons out there because we’re losing lives right here in the State of Illinois.”
A federal case challenging the law continues.