The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a challenge to an IL ordinance that banned semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.
Advertisement
Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia opposed the majority’s decision, saying the ban “flouts” the Supreme Court’s previous rulings on what rights the second amendment affords U.S. citizens. “The City of Highland Park’s ordinance bans only highly unsafe weapons that have been used in a series of mass shooting events, and it does not violate the Second Amendment”, it claims.
The 2013 ordinance included on its list of prohibited guns the popular AR-15, considered an assault weapon under the ban because of its likeness to the military’s M-16 rifle, though manufactured to not fire automatically with one trigger pull. Attorneys for 24 states urged the court to hear the case.
The Supreme Court has not taken up a major gun case since 2010. In 2008 the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Second Amendment protects the right to own a gun for self defense in the home.
The case of Friedman v. City of Highland Park has been listed in recent months for consideration by the nine Supreme Court Justices in private conference. They then took the matter to the 7th District U.S. States Court of Appeals, where the district lower court decision was affirmed in April.
Not long after Highland Park passed its ban, the rifle association went looking for a Highland Park resident to mount a legal challenge and found Friedman, according to Pearson. “Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons”, he said.
As a result, Highland Park, Ill. a suburb of Chicago, will be able to maintain its ban on firearm sales, possession, and manufacturing.
The decision in favor of assault-weapon bans is only binding in the Seventh Circuit’s juridictional area of Illinois, Wisconsin and in, said Jeffrey Jackson and William Rich, professors of constitutional law at Washburn Law School.
The weapons ban “is highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semi-automatic firearms used for lawful purposes” wrote Justice Thomas.
Monday’s decision not to hear an appeal in the IL case is being described as a victory for gun control in some national media and “people will probably over-react” to the decision on both sides of the gun issue.
“I contacted the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and they agreed to defend the case at no expense to the city”, Elrod said.
“If it has no other effect, Highland Park’s ordinance may increase the public’s sense of safety”.
Advertisement
Gun rights advocates praised the decision, and their foes anxious that it would undermine laws across the country. But in court papers, the organization argued millions of Americans use assault weapons for lawful purposes like hunting, recreational shooting and self-defense.
