Our friends over at The Center Square try to walk on eggshells, given they try to provide fair and balanced coverage and the political class in Illinois are by and large just a hint left of center. They just published a story about how court rulings against gun control schemes could have “ramifications” within Illinois.
We wrote about it days ago. Come to think of it, maybe they’re grabbing our stuff, making it more easily tolerated by the gun haters and republishing it. (Hint: Another reason to visit GSL daily and to have your family and friends keep up to date here as well…)
(The Center Square) – Recent court cases across the country challenging gun regulations could be an issue for conversation at the Illinois statehouse as the state faces a bevy of lawsuits over its gun and magazine ban.
After last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a New York case challenging that state’s gun laws, a new precedent was set. Gun rights advocate Todd Vandermyde said no longer are courts to balance public safety with fundamental rights. Instead, he said, courts are to rule on the text and tradition of the Second Amendment as a “supercharged right.”
“Courts around the country are taking the New York decision, which some call Bruen, to heart,” Vandermyde told The Center Square.
One recent federal case decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had a panel find the prohibition of someone possessing a firearm because they’re the subject of a civil domestic violence order, not a criminal conviction, is unconstitutional. The decision could have impacts on states with so-called “red flag laws” like Illinois.
Another case out of Oklahoma had a U.S. District Court judge rule a federal law prohibiting marijuana users from owning firearms is unconstitutional.
Illinois state Rep. Justin Slaughter, D-Chicago, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee that held hearings on Illinois’ gun and magazine ban before it was approved and enacted, sees the way courts across the country are handling different cases and is open to further discussions.
Blah blah blah. Ol’ (appropriately named) Justin Slaughter (D-Murder City USA) is “open to further discussions”? LOL.
“We’ll be sure not to kind of step on the toes of what the judiciary and our courts will be embarking upon, but we certainly want to have the conversation,” Slaughter told The Center Square. “More so from the perspective of doing a subject matter hearing. Hearing the concerns, hearing the questions, getting clarity on certain perspectives.”
He wants to continue infringing on your 2A rights while he “studies” the issue in hearings, hearings and hearings. Probably like the subject matter hearings before at the end of last year where gun rights advocates were specifically unwelcome to show up and talk until the final “subject matter hearing” and at that one, our friends faced 2 minute limits on their comments. While the gun grabbers on the committee played Candy Crush on their phones.
Sorry Justin. Talk to the hand.
We’ve seen your friend Kwame in court. He isn’t very impressive.