In a groundbreaking decision on December 14, the U.S. Supreme Court reinforced its stance on gun control by refusing, for the second time, to block Illinois’ Democratic-supported ban on assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines. This prohibition, a response to the tragic mass shooting in Highland Park in 2022, has sparked an ongoing legal battle led by the National Association for Gun Rights and Law Weapons & Supply, a firearms retailer.
The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene implies that the law will persist while the National Association for Gun Rights and Robert Bevis, the owner of Law Weapons & Supply, appeal a lower court’s ruling. The appellate court had previously rejected their plea for a preliminary injunction against the ban, which extends to another Chicago suburb, Naperville.
No dissenting opinions were publicly expressed by the justices, and this denial follows a similar rebuff in May when the Supreme Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ initial request for an injunction.
The genesis of this controversy lies in the tragic Independence Day parade massacre in Highland Park in 2022, which claimed seven lives and left dozens injured. The subsequent enactment of the Protect Illinois Communities Act in January by Governor J.B. Pritzker aimed to restrict the sale and distribution of various high-powered semiautomatic “assault weapons,” such as AK-47 and AR-15 rifles, along with magazines exceeding 10 rounds for long guns and 15 rounds for handguns.
The National Association for Gun Rights, known for its unwavering stance against any compromise on gun control, alongside Bevis and his firearms store, challenged Naperville’s and the state’s bans, asserting that these infringed upon the Second Amendment rights, which safeguard the right to “keep and bear” arms.
This legal battle is just one of several challenging the state’s ban in both federal and state courts. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Chicago, on November 3, sided against the challengers, contending that the bans were likely lawful. The court argued that the Second Amendment primarily applies to weapons intended for individual self-defense, differentiating assault weapons and high-capacity magazines as more akin to military-grade weaponry than tools for personal protection.
The availability of assault-style rifles continues to be a hotly debated topic in a nation deeply divided on how to address the pervasive issue of firearms violence, particularly in the context of frequent mass shootings. Despite the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, which stands at 6-3, it opted to uphold the ban, reaffirming its broader interpretation of the Second Amendment in a series of pivotal rulings since 2008. In 2022, the court recognized a constitutional right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, overturning a New York state law.
This decision, coming amidst a backdrop of societal discord, underscores the ongoing struggle to find common ground in addressing the complex issue of gun control in the United States.
