Everything You Need To Know About Why The U.S. Supreme Court Rejected the Gun Block Request in Illinois

The United States is known for multiple interesting factors, and the gun debate is prevalent. Liberals and conservatives argue on whether to remove civilian access to guns completely, ban specific types, or implement stricter laws.

The Illinois House of Representatives passed a bill to ban the distribution of certain assault weapons in January 2023. Naturally, some gun owners disliked the rule and requested to block the law; however, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a member of the U.S. Supreme Court, rejected the requests.

This post will further examine this situation, revealing everything you need to know about Justice Barrett and the Illinois gun case.

Reasons the Supreme Court rejected the Proposal

The Supreme Court rejected the request to block the Illinois law banning assault weapons, citing the precedent of District of Columbia v. Heller, a landmark case that upheld the right to bear arms.

Justice Barrett, who wrote the majority opinion, argued that the Illinois law was a reasonable restriction on the type of firearms that civilians can possess. At the same time, it did not infringe on the core right of self-defense or their ability to bear arms.

Essentially, the law did not ban all firearms, but only those that have features that make them more lethal and suitable for military use. 

Furthermore, Justice Barrett argued that the Second Amendment does not protect the right to own any weapon that one desires, but only those that are in common use for lawful purposes. 

She cited historical evidence that the framers of the Constitution did not intend to grant an unlimited right to bear arms but rather a limited one that the states could regulate. 

Therefore, the Illinois law was consistent with the original meaning and purpose of the Second Amendment, and the Supreme Court had no authority to overturn it.

Why Illinois Law Banned Assault Weapons

Many states allow citizens to own assault weapons, so why does Illinois restrict them? According to the Supreme Court, these types of weapons pose a greater threat to public safety than other types of firearms. 

The law was passed in response to a mass shooting that occurred on July 4, 2022, in Aurora, Illinois, where a gunman killed 12 people and injured 58 others. The assailant used an AR-15 rifle with a 100-round drum magazine, which is unnecessary for the average civilian. 

Illinois defines assault weapons as any semi-automatic rifle, shotgun, or pistol that has a detachable magazine and one or more of the following features:

• A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
• Thumbhole stock
• Folding or telescoping stock
• A grenade launcher or flare launcher
• Flash suppressor
• Forward pistol grip
• Barrel shroud
• Threaded barrel

The court also bans magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition but exempts certain firearms that are used for hunting, target shooting, or historical purposes.

Illinois hopes to prevent or limit this tragedy from happening again by limiting the availability and firepower of weapons designed for combat.

Supreme Court Rejected a Similar Challenge in May

This was not the first time that the Supreme Court dealt with a case involving assault weapons. In May 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a request to block the enforcement of a Maryland law that prohibited the sale and possession of certain semi-automatic firearms.

The law was challenged by a group of Maryland gun owners who claimed that it violated their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The U.S. Court of Appeals originally decided the case titled Bianchi v. Frosh for the Fourth Circuit in favor of the state.

The Supreme Court did not issue a written opinion on the matter, but it vacated the Fourth Circuit’s decision and remanded the case back to the lower court. The Supreme Court instructed the Fourth Circuit to reconsider the case in light of its recent ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

The case is still pending before the Fourth Circuit, and it is unclear how the lower court will rule on remand. Depending on the outcome, the case could have significant implications for the constitutionality of similar laws in other states that ban or regulate assault weapons.

Public Opinions on The Supreme Court’s Rejection

The Supreme Court’s decision defeated several gun rights advocates who challenged the law, including the Illinois Rifle Association, the National Rifle Association, and more than 800 gun owners and dealers. 

They argued that the law violated their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and that the law was too broad in defining what constitutes an assault weapon. They also claimed that the law was ineffective and unnecessary, as most gun crimes are committed with handguns, not rifles.

Further statistics from the Pew Research Center in September 2022 show that 53% of Americans support stricter gun laws, while 44% oppose them. The survey also found that 81% of Democrats and 28% of Republicans favor banning assault-style weapons, while 18% of Democrats and 69% of Republicans oppose such a ban.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court’s decision is consistent with the rulings of eight other states with similar laws banning assault weapons. Some include California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York.

Effectiveness of the Gun Restriction Law

While several gun rights advocates question the effectiveness of the ban, there is not enough data to evaluate the effectiveness of the ban on reducing gun violence in the state. Some studies have suggested that similar laws in other states result in lower rates of firearm homicides, mass shootings, and trafficking. 

For example, a study by RAND Corporation found that bans on large-capacity magazines may reduce the number of fatalities and injuries from mass shootings. At the same time, bans on assault-style weapons may reduce the number of firearms used in crimes that are traced to out-of-state sources. 

However, other studies have challenged the effectiveness and impact of such laws, arguing that they have little or no effect on gun violence. For example, a study by the University of Chicago Crime Lab found that the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004, had no discernible impact on gun violence outcomes.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s choice to reject the request to block the Illinois law was a landmark moment in the history of gun regulation and legislation in the U.S. Naturally, the decision could have far-reaching consequences for the future of the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms in the country.