A three-judge panel of the 4th District Appellate Court is deciding the fate of Illinois’ requirement that gun buyers qualify for and acquire a Firearms Owners Identification (FOID) card before purchasing a gun.
According to a report at hometownregister.com, the court heard testimony in the case brought by Guns Save Life on December 19. The pro-gun organization argues that the FOID requirement is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and that there are no comparable historical laws to meet the second Bruen standard.
“Just like you wouldn’t require a license to pray at home or post an unpopular opinion on X,” Guns Save Life attorney Clark Hildabrand said during the proceeding.
According to the hometownregister.com report, the state argued just the opposite.
“Government can regulate to seek to keep firearms out of the hands of people who are dangerous and therefore likely to misuse them,” attorney Jane Elinor Notz said. “That applies to public carry and at-home protection.”
Interestingly, the website reported that Judge Craig DeArmond took exception to that statement. During the testimony, he told Notz that the recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent dealt not with keeping firearms in the home but with allowing some regulations on the carrying of firearms in public.
“I know you’re doing your best to not answer the question, but it’ll go faster if you do,” Judge DeArmond said when questioning Notz on the state’s position, according to the report.
Plaintiffs also argued that the state was being disingenuous when it claimed the FOID requirement only impacts criminals.
“Illinois has the firearm restraining order law that would operate more similarly, but here the FOID law applies generally to all law-abiding citizens, those who are impacted by the law,” Hildabrand said. “Other prohibitions already impact felons.”
John Boch, Guns Save Life executive director, told thecentersquare.com that he feels like his organization got a favorable panel of judges to hear this very important case.
“Judge DeArmond savaged that representative from [Attorney General] Kwame Raoul’s office, just savaged her with her talking points and just outright calling her incorrect in some of her assertions,” Boch told the news outlet after Thursday’s hearing. “I’ve never seen an oral argument get that testy and rough for either side’s counsel.”
In the end, plaintiffs are asking the court to rule the FOID requirement unconstitutional and to stop enforcement of the law in the future. Regardless of how the court rules, the case will likely be appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.
Read the full article here
