Metro East Sun

Attorney Thomas Maag, of the Wood River-based Maag Law Firm LLC, is now requesting that a federal judge issue a partial judgment declaring the law banning 170 commonly owned firearms too vague. 

Maag, who filed the initial challenge in state court, is seeking partial judgment from a federal district judge regarding the state's consolidated gun ban challenge. 

“These people at the legislature have no idea what they’re writing about and there’s no objective way to determine what is banned,” Maag told The Center Square. “If it’s unconstitutionally vague as alleged, the whole ban should fall.”

The ban, enacted by Gov. J.B. Pritzker, prohibits over 170 semi-automatic firearms and restricts the sale and possession of magazines above certain capacities. Supporters argue that the law is necessary to limit the proliferation of such firearms, while opponents claim that it violates the Second Amendment by banning commonly owned firearms. Maag argues that the legislature inaccurately grouped certain firearms with AR platform guns and that the lack of objective criteria for determining banned firearms renders the law unconstitutional. The outcome of the motion could range from dismissal to striking down the entire ban, potentially affecting the consolidated cases currently pending in the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

The law went into effect in January. Several organizations, including the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., and the Second Amendment Foundation, along with gun owners from across Illinois, filed a joint action in federal court to challenge Illinois House Bill 5471, also known as the Protect Illinois Communities Act. The plaintiffs argue that the law violates the United States Constitution, specifically the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment's protection against the infringement of rights. They contend that the new law criminalizes law-abiding citizens and fails to address the real issue of enforcing existing gun laws. 

According to the National Review, out of the 102 sheriffs in Illinois, 85 have stated that they will not enforce Pritzker's sweeping gun ban. Critics, including Coles County Sheriff Kent Martin, argue that the law and additional requirements placed on law-abiding citizens will not deter criminals or reduce gun violence and provides an undue burden undermining gun owners' Second Amendment rights.

Martin was one of many sheriffs and state’s attorneys who said they would not enforce the law.

“Governor J.B. Pritzker recently signed legislation requiring gun owners to register certain firearms with the Illinois State Police and pay a fee for doing so, even if the firearm has been owned for many years,” Martin said in a statement, Prairie State Wire noted. “The legislation also places limitations on the capacity of ammunition magazines. Neither of these actions will make Coles County safer. As a parent and law enforcement officer, I am greatly concerned about the culture of violence in our society, but placing additional requirements on law-abiding citizens will not deter criminals or reduce gun violence.”

Meanwhile, in the ongoing Harrel/Barnett et al v Raoul et al lawsuits being heard by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the State of Illinois has submitted its brief, presenting arguments that are being challenged by pro-gun advocates.

“The State claims AR15s are not in common use when in fact, statistics show they are the most commonly used firearms with 24.5 million of them in use. They also claim these firearms are not suitable for hunting, self-defense or other lawful purposes. That is also untrue. They are the best firearm for self-defense. They are the best firearm for competitions," Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said in a press release.  "The last two coyotes I shot would disagree that they are not good for hunting. They won’t be able to testify, however. The State of course, wants everyone to believe they are commonly used in crimes when in fact they are only used in about 1.4% of crimes,” 

He added that in a few days, their pro-gun attorneys will file their briefs and "The State will have a chance to reply, and then we will have oral arguments on June 29." He said he believes "it will take a few weeks for the court to render a decision.  In any case, we will be moving on the Supreme Court of the United States.”