Protect Illinois Communities Act (Gun Ban) Declared Unconstitutional In Federal Court – Stay Issued Appears Limited

Illinois (ECWd) –

US District Judge Stephen P. McGlynn issued his order on the Protect Illinois Communities Act, commonly called the Illinois Assault Weapons Ban and Gun Registration law, on November 8, 2024.

The 168 page ruling can be downloaded at this link or viewed below.  We encourage everyone to read it all, twice or three times to grasp the importance of the court’s finding.

“..considering all of the evidence presented, the Court holds that the provisions of PICA criminalizing the knowing possession of specific semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, magazines, and attachments are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.” (emphasis added)

The court issued a Stay applicable to the enforcement and registration provisions in the law.

“The State of Illinois is hereby ENJOINED from the enforcement of PICA’s criminal penalties in accordance with 720 ILL. COMP. STAT. §§ 5/24-1(a)(14)–(16) (bump stocks and assault weapons); 5/24-1.9(a)–(h) (assault weapons and attachments); and 5/24-1.10(a)–(h) (large-capacity magazines) against all Illinois citizens, effective immediately. As the prohibition of firearms is unconstitutional, so is the registration scheme for assault weapons, attachments, and large-capacity magazines. Therefore, the State of Illinois is ENJOINED from enforcing the firearm registration requirements and penalties associated with entering false information on the endorsement affidavit for non-exempt weapons, magazines, and attachments previously required to be registered in accordance with 430 ILL. COMP. STAT. 65/4.1. This permanent injunction is STAYED for thirty (30) days.”

While we are not attorneys and we are not providing legal advice, it is our opinion, it appears on its face that the Stay issued by the court was not a Stay preventing people to now purchase and sell those guns outlined in the law nor parts and magazines.  Had the court intended for the public’s ability to sell and purchase those items they would have indicated as much in the order.