SCOTUS Relists IL Cases
We're approaching the second anniversary of the Bruen decision, which marked the first significant Second Amendment Supreme Court ruling in over a decade. As all of you know, Bruen introduced a new standard for assessing firearms restrictions.
Gun control advocates railed against the decision at the time, and here in Illinois, Pritzker reacted with PICA that directly flouted the new standard. Since then, courts across the country have grappled with how to apply the "historical analog" test put in place by Bruen. So desperate to prop up onerous restrictions, judges have invoked racist laws as "analogs" and, in some cases, ignored the requirements of Bruen altogether. What seems clear is that the application of the Bruen standard requires clarification, and if history is any guide, the Supreme Court will need to supply that clarity.
Several cases from various states, including Harrel v. Raoul, Herrera v. Raoul, Barnett v. Raoul, NAGR v. Naperville, Langley v. Kelly, and GOA v. Raoul, are pending at SCOTUS. In an order this morning, the Court denied reviewing the case of Bianchi v. Brown before the ruling was issued in the lower courts. It has already heard U.S. v. Rahimi and will issue its decision in that case sometime in the coming weeks. The Illinois cases were relisted, meaning that they will be brought up again at the next conference meeting.
Could one of these cases serve as a platform for new guidance to lower courts on applying Bruen? If so, how might that impact the rights of lawful gun owners? We hope one or all of the Illinois cases are that vehicle.
This fight is CRITICAL. Bruen restored the Second Amendment to its rightful status as a fundamental liberty, the restriction of which should be held to rigorous scrutiny. In the ensuing months, however, lawmakers and judges have attempted to wiggle around this new reality any way they can.