Last week’s ruling in in FFL-IL v. Pritzker represented a significant victory for a 2A community that has fought hard over decades to protect one of the Constitution’s most fundamental rights. The ruling overturned the state’s bans on so-called “assault weapons” and on standard capacity magazines.  

Bans like those imposed by Illinois, and cases challenging them, will sound familiar to California gun owners. Through cases like Duncan v. Bonta, Rhode v. Bonta, Boland v. Bonta and other, the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) fights onerous restrictions imposed by a governor and legislature hell-bent on gun control. 

With so many cases churning along in so many circuits, CRPA President & General Counsel Chuck Michel sat in for a quick Q&A about this latest development and what comes next.

Q: What is the significance of the ruling in the Illinois case(s)?
A: Up until now, most “assault weapon” rulings across the country have been preliminary injunctions, and the Supreme Court tends to prefer to rule on final judgments. Well, we now have a final judgment in our challenge to Illinois’s ban on common rifles, and one with a very dense evidentiary record at that. Should the Supreme Court decide to not grant review in another pending case right now, it would make this case a strong contender for Supreme Court review if the Seventh Circuit does not see things our way with the upcoming appeal.

Q: What impact might that have on cases pending in California?
A: It is nice persuasive authority to be able to cite a district court judgment with such an extensive record, but it is still just a district court ruling. However, suppose we get a favorable ruling in the Seventh Circuit. In that case, that is strong persuasive authority for California cases, as appeals courts do consider the rulings of other appeals courts to an extent. And of course, should the Supreme Court ever take up the case, it is binding on everyone.

Q:  Could the Supreme Court be the next step?
A:  Well, the Seventh Circuit is the next step, but it’s certainly possible after that. Right now, the Supreme Court is considering a 4th Circuit case also on final judgment appeal called Snope v. Brown, which deals with Maryland’s ban on “assault weapons”. We’ll know in the next few months if the Supreme Court will grant review. Even if they do, however, Snope does not involve a magazine capacity challenge, nor does it deal with a registration requirement. Our case also covers those issues. We are hopeful the Supreme Court will grant Snope and settle at least one of the questions in our case, and then grant cert in our case to decide the remainder.

Q:  If so, how do you handicap the Court’s next choice for a 2A case?
A:  As stated, Snope is the biggest contender simply because it is already there. But if the Supreme Court decides “assault weapons” are too controversial an issue, it could decide to take another case in the “hardware” genre, such as our case of Duncan v. Bonta, which deals with California’s ban on magazines with a capacity of over ten rounds. It could also consider a handgun case like our Boland v. Bonta matter, which is about California’s various requirements on handguns that function essentially as a ban on most models.

—Article courtesy of CRPA