2nd Federal Judge Refuses To Block Illinois Assault Weapons Ban

CHICAGO — A second federal judge on Tuesday denied a request to issue a temporary restraining order to blocking Illinois from enforcing the ban on the purchase or possession of certain firearms and large-capacity magazines.

The Protect Illinois Communities Act was approved by lawmakers and signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker in January. The law includes a list of banned firearms and features, and also restricts magazines larger than 15 bullets for handguns and 10 bullets for long guns for everyone but a certain excepted classes.

Pritzker had campaigned on a goal of passing an assault weapons ban and said after his re-election hoped to sign one into law before the first anniversary of the last year's Highland Park July 4th parade mass shooting.

Just over two months after the shooting, Highland Park resident Susan Karen Goldman and the National Association for Gun Rights filed a federal Second Amendment challenge to the city's local ordinance defining and banning "assault weapons" and "large capacity magazines."

Then, after the passage of the state law this year, Naperville gun shop owner Robert Bevis — who was already suing the city over its ordinance banning the local sale of assault weapons — amended his complaint to add the state as a defendant in his federal case.

And on Jan. 27, Dr. Javier Herrera, a Chicago emergency room doctor and volunteer SWAT medic, filed suit against state officials over the statewide ban.

"Dr. Herrera is no stranger to Chicago violence and the acute need for self-defense. During his medical residency, an armed attacker killed the attending physician on duty and two others at the hospital where he was working," according to his complaint. "He rendered aid at the scene."

In February, U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall rejected Bevis motion for a temporary restraining order. He then appealed that to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, seeking an injunction pending the appeal and was denied last week.

Then on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Lindsay Jenkins rejected Herrera's request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction prevent the state from enforcing its ban.

Jenkins found that the gun restrictions in the Protect Illinois Community Act "are consistent with the Nation's 'history and tradition' of treating particularly 'dangerous' weapons as unprotected."

Jenkins and Kendall agreed that regulations on assault weapons are not "unusual," citing the 10-year federal ban on their sale and more than a half dozen statewide bans.

"As the State Defendants put forth at oral argument, laws regulating weapons, including various firearms, developed over time in response to the type of harm that those weapons presented, as in the present case," Jenkins said in her 31-page ruling.

"Here, the [Chicago] City Code, [Cook] County Code, and [Protect] Illinois [Communities] Act similarly responded to 'dramatic technological changes' and 'unprecedented societal concerns' of increasing mass shootings by regulating the sale of weapons and magazines used to perpetrate them," Jenkins said, quoting from last year's landmark New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court expanded its reading of the Second Amendment individual right to bear arms.

Jenkins also rejected Herrera's argument that having to register his ownership of newly banned guns by the end of the year — a condition of continuing to lawfully possess them — was an irreparable and unconstitutional harm that needed to be halted while the case is litigated.

The judge noted that the Supreme Court had, in Bruen, suggested that such a registration requirement is permissible, comparing it to existing "shall-issue" statewide gun licensing regimes.

Jenkins also concluded that Herrera had failed to demonstrate any irreparable harm, finding that his claim that he cannot protect himself in his home without a 17-round magazine in one of his two pistols and that he has to drive too far in order to pick up his personal AR-15 rifle and bring it to monthly SWAT team training.

"None of the harms he identifies outweigh the overwhelming interest in public safety," Jenkins said.

On Wednesday, attorneys for Herrera indicated they plan to file an appeal.

Goldman's challenge to the Highland Park ordinance still awaits a ruling on motions for preliminary injunctions. Plus, Herrera and the city are both seeking to have the cases consolidated to a single challenge. A ruling on that motion also remains pending.

Attorneys for Highland Park argued that the balance of the public interest strongly favored the city's case.

"It is relevant that, despite the on-the-scene presence of half of Highland Park’s police force and nearly all of Highland Park’s fire department, first responders were helpless to prevent the horrific harm — or the shooter’s escape — because the weapon the shooter used allowed him to cause this massacre in such a short time," argued David Hoffman on behalf of the city.

The judge in the federal challenge to Highland Park's ordinance, senior U.S. District Judge Harry Leinenweber, has also recently presided over the "ComEd Four" trial, in which former officials of power company Commonwealth Edison are accused of trying to bribe former Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan. After six weeks of testimony, the jury began deliberations Tuesday.

The Illinois Supreme Court is also considering state court challenges to the Protect Illinois Communities Act after an appellate court panel ruled it violated the Illinois Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law and another state judge declared it "facially unconstitutional."

Related: Assault Weapon Ban Temporary Restraining Order Upheld By Appeals Court