Estimated reading time: 0 minutes
When a law makes self-defense illegal, you know something’s wrong. That’s exactly what an Illinois Circuit Court judge just ruled in State of Illinois v. Vivian Claudine Brown, a case backed by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Illinois State Rifle Association.
The court struck down Illinois’ Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) card requirement for possessing a firearm in the home—and honestly, it’s about time.
Table of contents
Judge Drops the Hammer on Illinois’ FOID Scheme
Judge T. Scott Webb didn’t mince words in his decision. He made it clear that Ms. Brown—a law-abiding citizen—was well within her Second Amendment rights when she kept a .22 rifle in her own home, FOID card or not.
And he took the state’s logic to the woodshed.
“If an intruder had entered Ms. Brown’s home,” the judge noted, “and threatened violence towards her and, God forbid, she was forced to use that .22 rifle to defend herself, she would have committed a class A misdemeanor carrying with it a possible penalty of up to 364 days in the county jail.”
SEE ALSO: Beretta 1301 Tactical Mod. 2 Review
Imagine that—defend yourself, go to jail. That’s the kind of upside-down thinking the FOID law promotes.
Judge Webb called it what it is: “asinine.”
A Battle Won, But the War Ain’t Over
This case has been bouncing around Illinois courts like a bad check. Alan Gottlieb, SAF’s Executive VP, pointed out that the state will likely appeal again—meaning we could see this case land before the Illinois Supreme Court for a third time.
“It’s hard to see how the Illinois Supreme Court avoids the constitutional issue, as they have done on the previous two visits,” Gottlieb said.
In other words, Illinois’ anti-gun politicians are running out of places to hide.
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut also laid it out plainly:
“Illinois’ FOID card poses an untenable barrier to the exercise of Second Amendment rights in one’s home.”
He’s right. Forcing people to jump through government hoops just to keep a firearm in their own home is unconstitutional—and this ruling drives that point home.
What’s Next?
Illinois officials will likely fight tooth and nail to keep their restrictive gun laws in place, but this ruling is a big step toward dismantling one of the worst gun control schemes in the country.
The Second Amendment Foundation isn’t backing down, and neither should we. This case is proof that when we push back, we win. Stay tuned, because Illinois may have just lost a major battle in its war on gun rights.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
Now you just know, that Pookie and Ray Ray ran right out and got their FOID card, along with reporting their income from drug dealing to the IRS!
I’ll say it over and over, the Communist Progressive Liberal Criminals don’t hate guns, they HATE law-abiding gun owners!
Ms. Brown exercises her 2A rights without a state permit (FOID) therefore she is a criminal. Since she is a criminal, she cannot own any firearms, and her case should be tossed out of court and Ms. Brown should suffer any and all relevant punishments. If she had an FOID, she would NOT have standing in court and could NOT challenge the unconstitutional law. Meanwhile the top LE official in IL defies federal immigration laws despite the Supremacy Clause.
Just wondering-are you a politician because what you wrote makes absolutely no sense to me.
Not a politician or a lawyer. Just stating the current law that people in IL have hanging over our heads, sorry I could NOT make it make sense.
Hopefully the USSC will remedy what Pritzker and the state democrats of IL have created but that seems to be at best a very slow methodical walk.
Kinda wondering the same thing, CZ. Trying to keep up with what Kane stated (although not totally understanding it), an ILLEGAL immigrant has more rights in IL than an ACTUAL US citizen. Note the word ILLEGAL which in the words of Tom Homan means they’ve already broken the law!
Yeah, it’s tricky to understand the courts in IL even when a Judge like Webb or McGlynn render a legally sound decision. The process has played out in the IL courts before and it seems unlikely that the US Constitution will have bearing unless the USSC will hear the case.
Illinois would be better served by dropping this case before it gets worse. If they cannot dodge the constitutional issue, as they have in the past, Bruen seems a clear barrier to upholding the FOID law.
Other states are even worse. As I recall, both Hawaii and New Jersey require that one obtain permission from the police for each and every firearm one wants to purchase. In New Jersey, you have find the gun, take the specifications of that particular firearm, including the serial number, to the police to get permission, and then you had to go back to the ffl to actually complete the purchase, hoping that the ffl had not sold that firearm. To add to that burden, the state police that issues the permits has a backlog (probably intentional) of 6 months to a year to get the permission slip, notwithstanding a statute that requires issuance within one month.