Federal Judge Rules Ban on Concealed Firearms on Public Transportation Unconstitutional

A federal judge in Illinois has ruled that banning concealed firearms on public transportation violates the Second Amendment, striking down a key provision of the state’s gun control laws.

At a Glance

U.S. District Judge Iain Johnston ruled Illinois’ ban on concealed carry in public transit unconstitutional
The ruling is based on a 2022 Supreme Court decision requiring gun laws to align with 18th-century historical practices
The case was brought by four concealed carry license holders who avoid public transit due to the threat of prosecution
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul is likely to appeal the decision
Gun owners are advised to continue following existing laws until a final judgment is made

Judge Strikes Down Illinois Public Transit Gun Ban

In a landmark decision, U.S. District Judge Iain Johnston has ruled that Illinois’ prohibition on carrying concealed firearms on public transportation is unconstitutional. The ruling, which stems from a 2022 lawsuit filed by four individuals, challenges a key component of Illinois’ concealed carry law that has been in effect since 2014.

Judge Johnston’s decision is rooted in the 2022 Supreme Court case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new standard for evaluating gun laws. This test requires that firearms regulations be consistent with the historical tradition of the late 18th century when the Bill of Rights was drafted.

A federal judge in Rockford has declared a state law banning concealed firearms on public transit systems unconstitutional – at least as it applies to four individuals who challenged it. @Peterqhancock reports https://t.co/uFbgl4wYp7 pic.twitter.com/fiSPClE0Sm

— Capitol News Illinois (@CapitolNewsIL) September 3, 2024

Legal Reasoning and Implications

In his ruling, Judge Johnston stated that the defendants “failed to meet their burden to show an American tradition of firearm regulation at the time of the Founding that would allow Illinois to prohibit plaintiffs — who hold concealed carry permits — from carrying concealed handguns for self-defense onto the CTA and Metra.” This decision underscores the growing tension between modern gun control measures and the constitutional interpretation of the Second Amendment.

In his ruling, Johnston wrote that the defendants, “failed to meet their burden to show an American tradition of firearm regulation at the time of the Founding that would allow Illinois to prohibit plaintiffs — who hold concealed carry permits — from carrying concealed handguns for self-defense onto the CTA and Metra.”

The plaintiffs’ attorney, David Sigale, described the ruling as “breathtaking, jawdropping, and eyepopping.” While the immediate impact of the decision is limited to the four plaintiffs involved in the lawsuit, Sigale suggests that “the court’s analysis and ultimate declaration of unconstitutionality is arguably applicable to any CCL holder on any public transportation in Illinois.”

A federal judge in Rockford has declared a state law banning concealed firearms on public transit systems unconstitutional – at least as it applies to four individuals who challenged it in court. https://t.co/LPhE7mubY3

— ABC 7 Chicago (@ABC7Chicago) September 3, 2024

Political Reactions and Next Steps

The ruling has sparked immediate reactions from state officials. Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul has indicated through a spokesperson that he is reviewing the decision and will likely appeal. Governor JB Pritzker has also criticized the ruling, expressing hope that it will be overturned.

It’s important to note that until a final judgment is made, concealed carry license holders are advised to continue following existing laws. The case is part of a broader series of legal challenges to Illinois gun laws, including the state’s assault weapons ban enacted in January 2023.

As this legal battle unfolds, it raises significant questions about the future of gun regulations in Illinois and potentially across the nation. The ruling’s emphasis on historical consistency with 18th-century practices may have far-reaching implications for other gun control measures, potentially reshaping the landscape of Second Amendment rights in America.