Welcome to GSL

This login is for the website administrators.

Please use the member login link in the main navigation bar to access the members sections.

Member Login
Lost your password?

Read the Illinois Attorney General’s Brief in the Brown FOID Case

April 30, 2019

[Note:  An earlier version of this had it as the “White” case, when it was Vivian Brown.  We regret our color dyslexia.]

A judge in Illinois’ Second Circuit found the Illinois FOID Act unconstitutional in a case against Vivian Brown last year.  We wrote about it back in March.  The Illinois Attorney General has appealed the case to the Illinois Supreme Court and last Friday, Kwame Raoul submitted the Illinois AG’s brief. 

This is the case that the Second Amendment Foundation has taken on, with the assistance of the Illinois State Rifle Association and Illinois Carry.  The SAF has retained ISRA’s General Counsel David Sigale (pronounced Seagle) to represent Ms. Brown as her court-appointed public defender has since retired.

Guns Save Life had earlier expressed some concerns about the ISRA / SAF attorney David Sigale.  However, the ISRA and SAF have both assured us that:

  1.  David Sigale has won more gun law cases on Constitutional grounds than any other attorney practicing.  In fact, ISRA President Doug Mayhall told Guns Save Life members at Sunday night’s Chicagoland GSL meeting that Sigale is 16 for 16.  “Nobody has won more,” Mayhall said.  “And if I needed an attorney, I’d absolutely hire David Sigale.”
  2. Ultimately it is Mrs. Brown’s choice about who represents her.  If she doesn’t want more lawyers arguing on her behalf, that’s her choice to make.  She reportedly contacted the SAF about her case and they took it.  That’s what ISRA President Doug Mayhall told us in Chicago, and that’s what Illinois Carry Spokeswoman Valinda Rowe has posted on social media and, if memory serves, at she and other Illinois Carry leaders have written the same there as well.

Both groups have expressed complete and total confidence that Mr. Sigale will see the case to a successful conclusion for gun owners.   ISRA in particular says we could not have a better attorney representing the Land of Lincoln’s 2.5 million gun owners interests in seeing the FOID Act struck down state-wide.

We’ll do analysis on the state’s brief in the coming days.  For now, here it is for your reading pleasure.



16 Responses to Read the Illinois Attorney General’s Brief in the Brown FOID Case

  1. Vincent Romano on April 30, 2019 at 11:55 am

    also is kwame saying we don’t have to have our foid on us as if constructive possession… just knowing where it is?!

    “Constructive possession exists where there is no actual,
    personal, present dominion over contraband(foid), but defendant had knowledge of the presence of the contraband ( foid ), and had control over the area where the contraband (foid) was found.” People v. Hunter, 2013 IL 114100, ¶ 19

    So F you Kwame and thanks!

  2. ChanceMcCall on April 30, 2019 at 5:10 pm

    I’m not an attorney but I found the state’s example of a wife not needing a FOID card when a firearm is present in the home interesting. It presupposes that a husband with a FOID card has a safe in which he keeps his firearm and that his wife does not have the combination.

    The last I knew, Illinois does not have a law requiring gun owners to have a safe in the first place, let alone a requirement that guns must be stored in them. I also have to believe that whatever attorney wrote that example has never been married.

  3. Bill on April 30, 2019 at 6:53 pm

    The FOID card is Unconstitutional because it is an INFRINGEMENT to the 2nd amendment and anyone with Half a brain would know this. OF course democrat politicians do not have a brain.

    • peewee on April 30, 2019 at 9:15 pm


    • Meria Rodriguez on May 1, 2019 at 7:50 am


  4. Joe on May 1, 2019 at 12:42 am

    I have little faith in ISRA I’m afraid they will come up with some excuse to shrink back in fear its time we give no ground to the gun grabbers and no money to ISRA till we get results

  5. Doc L on May 1, 2019 at 5:35 am

    I think this is great! If Illinois loses the foid card, there goes the higher fees, social media check, and fingerprint fee bull shit they want to tack on. Talk sbout infringement.

  6. Travis Nave on May 1, 2019 at 6:51 am

    Illinois is the ONLY state with a FOID. That should be reason enough to get rid of it.

    • Bob simmons on May 1, 2019 at 11:19 am

      Illinois May be the only state with a “foid”. But there are numerous states in which a law abiding citizen must go through safety classes and posses a “permit” or “license” to legally posses and carry that firearm. All “foid” is is anonther way of saying permit or license. I’m not saying I agree with it But it is odd every talks about how unconstitutional the foid is, but no one seems to complain about all the other states that make it a requirement to be permitted to Cary or own a firearm.

  7. Bradley Day on May 1, 2019 at 7:59 am

    The argument for the foid being a reasonable cost to exercise a right is the exact opposite of the Democrat position on voter laws. The cost of an id discourages people from exercising their right to vote.
    They claim the foid prevents felons and mentally ill from buying a firearm but as a foid owner when I go but a new gun, I still have to answer all the same questions and pass another background check. And they don’t charge me$10 for that check like they do for the foid.

    Brad Day

  8. Jason A Mycroft on May 1, 2019 at 6:12 pm

    The Illinois state police background check completely missed the Aurora shooter having a felony conviction against him and was granted a FOID card. Then you went to a gun dealer and passed the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and purchased a handgun. When is when he went to get his ccw license did he get popped for having a felony. They sent him a nice letter to turn over his weapon and no follow up.

    • Mr. 2nd amendment on May 2, 2019 at 4:36 pm

      My understanding is that the state in which the Aurora shooter committed his first crime did not put that information into the system. That is why it was missed for his FOID card.

      • Derek Schneider on May 20, 2019 at 11:09 am

        The previous felony didn’t get flagged until the shooter applied for a CCW, which required submitting fingerprints. The FOID currently does not, but legislation to make this a FOID requirement, due to this shooter specifically, is currently working it’s way through the Illinois General Assembly. This will raise the application cost to $50-$100 or more and require in-person application submission at an Illinois State Police facility, which are extremely limited. This will cause an undue burden on people who have limited means, or the ability to travel, resulting in a direct infringement of their Constitutional Rights.

  9. Hop on May 3, 2019 at 12:05 am

    Congratulations GSL on getting NRA backing on your members’ FOID suit. Go get ’em!

    Preclude tyranny! Support NRA, GSL, SAF, GOA, ISRA any way you can, ladies and gentlemen.

    • Bird on May 5, 2019 at 2:00 am

      I’ve seen no proof that GSL has actually filed any suit against the FOID, and since this article was posted, the NRA has actually back-peddled and removed the story of the NRA supporting it from their website..

  10. need help writing a book on May 5, 2019 at 3:05 pm

    An outstanding share! I’ve just forwarded this onto a colleague who had been conducting
    a little homework on this. And he in fact ordered me
    lunch simply because I found it for him… lol. So allow me to
    reword this…. Thank YOU for the meal!! But yeah, thanx for spending the time to discuss
    this topic here on your internet site.