Illinois banned the sale and possession of more than 170 semi-automatic firearms and magazines above certain capacities in January 2023. Consolidated cases challenging the ban were heard during a trial in East St. Louis in September.

Federal Judge Stephen McGlynn of the Southern District of Illinois said in his ruling Friday that the ban is “an affront to the Second Amendment and must be enforced.”

He issued a permanent injunction against the law, but ordered it to be in effect for 30 days.

Dan Eldridge of the Illinois Federal Firearms License Holders, one of the plaintiff groups in the consolidated case, said all eyes are now on how the appeals court reacts.

“And right now the existing panel is split 50-50,” Eldridge told The Center Square.

The previous appeals court panel that handled McGlynn’s preliminary injunction in the case in April 2023 split 2-1, saying the state was likely to move forward on the merits.

One of the majority appellate judges on the previous panel, Diane Wood, has retired since their preliminary ruling. It is unclear, if the case is finally decided in district court, if there will be a new full panel or if another appeals judge will be assigned to the existing panel of Easterbrook and Judge Michael Brennan.

“Also, Judge (Frank) Easterbrook left the door open because he was convinced that an AR-15 is not the same as an M4 or an M16,” Eldrige said. “And I think we did that, and I think Judge McGlynn made a strong, strong case that this is a meaningless standard.”

On the argument that modern semi-automatic firearms available to the general public are too similar to military-issued firearms, McGlynn said that does not fit with the precedent set by the US Supreme Court or the record developed during the four-year trial days he supervised in September.

“Critically, the M16 and M4 are military weapons subject to exacting standards of military specificity and rigorous quality assurance inspections; The AR15 by definition cannot and does not have the same quality assurance standard,” McGlynn wrote. “In particular, the M16s/M4s are designed for increased wear and have a barrel that is capable of sustained fire without overheating.”

Eldridge, who also owns Maxon Shooter’s Supplies and Indoor Range in Des Plaines, said it’s entirely possible the appeals court will side with the plaintiffs.

“Probably a better-than-even chance that we win at the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and if we win in a panel, I don’t know if the state will appeal to the Supreme Court,” Eldridge said.

A request for a full hearing of the appeals court, known as “en banc,” could be made after the case is heard by a three-judge panel.

Gun control groups had been expecting McGlynn’s decision.

“Judge McGlynn’s decision to again strike down Illinois’ ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines is entirely predictable. It did before when the statute was passed in early 2023; and in his submissions at the hearing in September, he made it clear that he would do it again,” said G-PAC Executive Board member John Schmidt.

Closing the trial on the bench, McGlynn reflected on the 1917 race riots in East St. Louis and asked what would have been different if black victims had then had the types of firearms at issue in this case to protect themselves. He also wrote about the issue in his order issued on Friday.

“Limiting civilians’ choice of weapons would tip the scales in favor of aggressors, who will likely already have various tactical advantages, including the element of surprise,” the judge wrote.

McGlynn wrote in his permanent order that he sympathizes with those who have lost loved ones to gun violence, but “such tragedies are no excuse to curtail the Illinois public’s Second Amendment rights.” .

Eldridge said McGlynn’s 168-page decision is powerful.

“In no other context do you hold law-abiding people responsible for the depraved acts of disturbed individuals,” Eldridge said. “It’s as simple as that.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The state filed an appeal Friday night. Federal courts were closed Monday for Veterans Day.

“I think the Court of Appeals will almost certainly extend the stay pending the outcome of the appeal,” Schmidt said. “Nothing in McGlynn’s opinion suggests any reason to anticipate that the Court of Appeals will not reverse its order again.”