by John Boch
How does a SCOTUS win impact Illinois’ PICA law? The short answer: it’s a multi-faceted answer.
The honest answer is: a win in Viramontes kills the heart of PICA. It does not, by itself, delete every line of the statute from the Illinois compiled statutes at 10:01 a.m. the morning the opinion drops.
First, the map. Viramontes v. Cook County (consolidated with Connecticut’s Grant v. Higgins) is the AR-15 case. Argument is December 2. A decision is expected by the end of June. The question before the Court is whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect possession of AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles.
Cook County’s ordinance is the case on the docket. PICA is the statewide clone of that same idea. The Seventh Circuit just propped PICA back up in Barnett on July 9. A Supreme Court holding that those rifles are protected arms does not “amend” PICA automatically. It does make PICA’s core ban legally indefensible the minute the opinion is published.
How the death actually happens:
1. The constitutional rule is immediate.
A Supreme Court holding is the supreme law of the land on the question decided. If the Court says these rifles are arms in common use and cannot be banned, Illinois does not get a legislative session to “incorporate” that into state law. The ban is already unconstitutional. Springfield can sulk, whine and issue countless press releases. It cannot lawfully keep arresting people for owning America’s favorite rifle.
2. The paperwork is not immediate.
PICA is a different statute than the Cook County ordinance. Pritzker and Raoul will claim magazines, feature tests, registration, and “dangerous and unusual” leftovers somehow survive. That is the game they’ll play. Plaintiffs in the PICA cases will walk into the Southern District and the Seventh Circuit the same week with Viramontes in hand and demand an injunction. That filing is measured in days, not years. The delay is lawyers and stubborn officials, not a missing act of the General Assembly.
Judge McGlynn will not play games. The Seventh Circuit? That’s another matter. But even if they do, read on…
3. Enforcement dies faster than the statute.
This is the part that matters for real people like you and me. After a high-profile Supreme Court ruling that these rifles cannot be banned, a cop who cuffs someone for mere possession of an AR-15 is betting his qualified immunity, his department’s budget, and his personal lawsuit exposure on JB Pritzker’s press release. The vast majority of LEOs will not want any part of that crap sandwich. Most state’s attorneys outside the usual suspects will not touch it. Cook County is the primary “suspect.” Unfortunately for them, they are a defendant in Viramontes. They will be staring straight at the holding.
4. Dealers are the slowest moving part.
FFLs live in fear of ATF and state disciplinary boards. In downstate Illinois, formerly banned rifles will be on the counter fast — days once counsel signs off. Cook County and Chicago will take a little longer because every general counsel will want a piece of paper that says “you will not be prosecuted for the sale.” Plan on a short, ugly lag in the collar counties, not a multi-year freeze. It’ll happen at more aggressive dealers sooner.
5. Magazines may be the leftover fight.
The question presented is rifles. If the opinion is written very tightly, PICA’s magazine ban could limp along until the next case. If the Court writes like it means it, that provision falls with the rifle ban. Do not bet the store on magazine language until you read the actual opinion.
Practical answer for the rifle sitting at the shop and the safe at home:
Do not treat opinion day as “drive over at lunch and pick up a new AR-.” Treat it as the day the legal floor collapses and the injunction practice starts. If the shop is not eager to complete the transfer that’s already begun long ago, that is a business decision, not a constitutional one. A win in June means the ban on that rifle is dead in principle. The last mile is an injunction or written non-enforcement, plus a dealer willing to complete the 4473.
Bottom line: Get the safe now. If the Court does what it should do, you will need the space. If Illinois plays the New York post-Bruen games for a few extra weeks, you still need the space. Either way the substitutes filling the safe today are not a reason to be unprepared.
And yes: a whole lot of rifles that suffered tragic boating accidents during the PICA era will make miraculous recoveries once possession is no longer a crime. That is a joke about the politics of this ban. It is not legal advice to possess anything still prohibited today.
Bottom line: Viramontes does not require the Illinois legislature to repeal PICA for the AR ban to be dead. It does require follow-on paper to mop up PICA specifically, and dealers will want cover. The ban does not get a victory lap. The gamesmanship gets a short one.