* From comments on Friday following ruling by a judge in Effingham County on the state’s assault weapons ban…
More statewide chaos thanks to a local judge.
“All they are saying,” claimed Illinois Sheriffs’ Association Executive Director Jim Kaitschuk about dozens of his members, is, ‘we’re not going to knock on people’s doors to ask whether they have registered their firearms. And if they’re arrested solely on that charge, we will not house them in our jails until ordered to do so by a competent authority.”
Springfield’s WICS TV reported that Kaitschuk also believes the reaction to what those sheriffs have said about refusing to enforce the state’s new assault weapons ban because of their constitutional objections has been “overblown.”
Well, when you put it that way, maybe so. But if that’s the case, then why even facilitate the release of a nearly identical statement by as many as 90 (according to Kaitschuk) county sheriffs saying they won’t enforce a law?
Kaitschuk admitted to Chicago’s ABC 7 that there’s nothing in the law mandating local compliance checks. “That is not a charge that is provided to us or mandated to us in the bill that passed and was signed by the governor.”
What the sheriffs have basically done is to deliberately inflame the public for no good reason, and then tossed in an empty threat to not house violators in their jails unless they have an order from a judge.
And while there has been much rejoicing in some Downstate areas over their local sheriffs’ performative “virtue signaling,” there has been some strong pushback in the suburbs where, for instance, DuPage County Sheriff James Mendrick released one of those boiler plate statements vowing not to enforce the new registration law because he believed the statute was unconstitutional.
In response, DuPage County’s 15 Democratic state legislators released a statement saying they were “dismayed and angered by the recent pronouncement by the DuPage County Sheriff to unilaterally direct his office to flout and disregard the duly passed and signed Protect Illinois Communities Act. The sheriff has no authority to determine the constitutionality of a law — that is up to the courts.”
“The sheriff’s words send a clear message that lawbreakers are welcome here,” the statement read.
One of the signatories was Rep. Maura Hirschauer, D-Batavia, who introduced an assault weapons ban and worked her bill for months before it was taken over by more experienced hands.
Mendrick barely won election in 2018, but the Democrats didn’t field a candidate against him in 2022, which turned out to be an even stronger year for the local party.
Elections obviously have consequences.
But the sheriffs currently have significant powers in state statutes, and legislative elections can have consequences, too. Some legislators are obviously starting to get pretty fired up over the sheriffs’ behavior of late.
During the 2019 cannabis legalization debate, for instance, sheriffs disseminated tons of disinformation (one even claimed that sheriffs would be forced to euthanize all their drug-sniffing dogs). Several sheriffs sided with the far right during the COVID-19 mitigation period and refused to enforce executive orders, and many eagerly contributed to the hysteria over the SAFE-T Act. And now this.
Many legislators are former local government officials, so they’ve traditionally been reluctant to take up issues like consolidation, the limits of local authority, etc. I do not know if this latest blowup will change anything. But, at the same time, I don’t recall ever seeing a reaction quite like the one issued by those 15 state legislators today.
Lake County’s sheriff issued a statement in favor of the law, and one of the principal sponsors who helped drag the bill across the finish line, Lake County-based state Rep. Bob Morgan, D-Deerfield, had this to say on the radio the other day about the other sheriffs’ statements: “I keep coming back to the fact that I think it’s embarrassing for them. They really literally only have one job. Their job is to follow the law and enforce the law. And they’re saying, ‘We’re not going to do that.’ And so, I think they should be pretty embarrassed.”
State statute requires sheriffs, acting as their counties’ supervisors of safety, to enforce all state traffic laws. But there is no requirement to enforce other laws. And their state-mandated oaths of office require them to support the U.S. and Illinois constitutions, but not individual laws.
Law enforcement discretion is a long-accepted policy. But sheriffs issuing written statements flatly declaring they will not enforce a state law no matter what sure does appear to go well beyond that.
Crafting a law to deal with the problem, though, could be difficult.
But that leads me to wonder what these sheriffs, including the DuPage County Sheriff, will do if firearms dealers in their counties continue selling the currently banned weapons, and devices like “switches” [as pointed out in comments, switches are illegal under federal law, so that bit would apply to the other 800 or so plaintiffs and not to FFLs] to anyone not on the above list.
- What's the point? - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:14 am:
“Switches” are and have always been illegal. Any firearm dealer in any state dumb enough to sell them is going to prison for a long time regardless of what the local sheriff thinks.
- Donnie Elgin - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:17 am:
“firearms dealers in their counties continue selling the currently banned weapons, and devices like “switches,”
switches are banned by ATF and federal law. No FFL would sell them now or before this new law passed.
https://www.atf.gov/our-history/internet-arms-trafficking
- Nagidam - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:19 am:
===More statewide chaos thanks to a local judge.===
There is chaos in my opinion because the State passed an unconstitutional law…but I digress.
This is how our system of government works. The GA passed legislation and the people are challenging the constitutionality of that legislation. Sometimes it is not pretty. There is a challenge at the Federal level to the gun and mag ban that I think will bring some more clarity.
As for the Sheriffs, I think they certainly have an overreach of their authority. The legal and political question is what law is next they don’t want to follow. They may not like the law, but they have an obligation to uphold the constitution or find a legal redress otherwise.
- Norseman - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:20 am:
Quick in today’s legal system is like going from snail speed to sloth speed.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:23 am:
===have always been illegal==
Federal.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:28 am:
There is early reporting that the Monterey Park shooter was quickly identified because the gun wrestled away from him had been registered. But I get that these sheriffs find that requirement somehow overly invasive. Seems like these sheriffs should worry more about identifying and stopping mass shooters. That is the impetus behind this new law…though they seem to want to ignore that fact.
- JS Mill - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:34 am:
=There is chaos in my opinion because the State passed an unconstitutional law…but I digress.=
That you Justice Kavanaugh?
Maybe let the courts work this one out, because on a plain reading of the second amendment it is allowable. But I digress…
Your other point on the overstep is correct.
The ILGA needs to pass legislation that ensures that law enforcement do exactly that. Enforce the laws. This, I pick and choose stuff is getting old real fast.
- Todd - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:35 am:
NO one and I mean NO is selling switches as an FFL. Tttthey have been illegal under state and federal law for sometime, ‘86 for the feds and at least mid ’90s for Illinois. ATF has been chasing down those acquired from ebay, but some people are 3d printing them.
The other issue you raise does present a problem and who can they sell to? Or can they return firearms in for repair or on consignment not completed prior to the date signed/ and there is a lot more where that came from
- Jerry - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:42 am:
Unconstitutional, unless you happen to be at the 4th of July parade and watch your kids head get blown off. Thats exactly what our Founders meant.
- Mel - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:43 am:
I continue to not understand why DuPage Dems didn’t run a candidate for sheriff
- Donnie Elgin - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:46 am:
“so that bit would apply to the other 800 or so plaintiffs and not to FFLs”
Selling a switch is illegal under all circumstances. Those other 800-plus folks are FOID card holders unlikely to be trafficking in switches. Switches are for street crime as pointed out by NPR and Chicago police
“The auto sears work on myriad handguns, but Cook said the illegal machine guns are especially attractive to gang members because they’re more effective in accomplishing their mission — to shoot and kill”
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/28/1131026241/chicago-handgun-violence-auto-sear-machine-gun
- Not a fan - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:46 am:
““The sheriff’s words send a clear message that lawbreakers are welcome here,” the statement read.”
Start with considering that “law breakers” are technically “law abiding citizens” until Jan 1st 2024. But it sounds flamboyant politically.
- TheInvisibleMan - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:48 am:
–But that leads me to wonder what these sheriffs, including the DuPage County Sheriff, will do–
More people in the suburbs will simply have to do what we’ve already had to start doing in Will County.
Don’t bother with the sheriff. Take any concerns directly to the state police. The bar may be low, but they are the most competent law enforcement agency accessible for the average person.
- TheInvisibleMan - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:52 am:
–The legal and political question is what law is next they don’t want to follow.–
At some point, a reporter somewhere should have been asking these sheriffs what other state laws they have determined to be unconstitutional in their newly appointed duty of discerning constitutionality.
Because there is a rather glaring and long-standing state law that *is* unconstitutional still on the books, and not a single one of them has ever mentioned they will refuse to enforce it.
Older readers here will probably know what law this is. It has to do with US flags, and rapid exothermic oxidation.
- DuPage Saint - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:57 am:
I believe that the county coroner has the powers to arrest a county sheriff for malfeasance or nonfeasance of sheriff is not doing his duty. At least I have as always told that. It would be fun to see a coroner arrest a sheriff
And talk about gerrymandering I am old enough to remember when DuPage had no Democratic legislators now they have 15?
- rtov - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 10:58 am:
Not sure how the exercise of the process by which our constitution requires laws to be challenged constitutes chaos. Unless your standard for chaos is simply results with which you disagree.
- SweetLou86 - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:00 am:
Polic/Sheriffs/Prosecutors love to deny that they have discretion in what and how laws are enforced until they find a law they don’t like. The hypocrisy of it all…
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:01 am:
=== Not sure how the exercise of the process by which our constitution requires laws to be challenged constitutes chaos. Unless your standard for chaos is simply results with which you disagree.===
Will you follow the law until it is ruled unconstitutional or are you one that will “decide” for yourself what is constitutional or not before any ruling?
That’s the thing.
If you’re unsure about process, talk to the Sheriffs who are seemingly now judges.
- Todd - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:06 am:
Rich “switches” are parts to make a full auto, much like the full auto hammer and disconnector for an M-16
they have been illegal under 24-1a7 for a long time
(7) Sells, manufactures, purchases, possesses or
carries:
(i) a machine gun, which shall be defined for the
purposes of this subsection as any weapon, which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manually reloading by a single function of the trigger, including the frame or receiver of any such weapon, or sells, manufactures, purchases, possesses, or carries any combination of parts designed or intended for use in converting any weapon into a machine gun, or any combination or parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person;
- That’s Just It - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:07 am:
The tactic of being a “sanctuary” for not enforcing laws is dangerous.
It was dangerous when Dems did it in terms of immigration violations and vowing to not cooperate with ICE and it is dangerous now. It reeks of anarchy.
Always be careful what tactics are employed. It will always come boomeranging back in the form of a cause the original utilizers of the tactic now despise.
Predictable from the start.
- Mason born - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:09 am:
Willy
I believe Rich’s “Chaos” statement is in response to the judges ruling. That is the correct process no. I may loathe the lawyer in that case but that is the appropriate process.
Speaking of that same loathsome lawyer is already repeating his grifter pitch for a round 2 of cash.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:14 am:
- Mason Born -
=== [as pointed out in comments, switches are illegal under federal law, so that bit would apply to the other 800 or so plaintiffs and not to FFLs]===
Looking at it from enforcement “choices”
- rtov - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:14 am:
First, according to the post, the putative chaos was alleged to have been caused by a “local judge”, who was issuing an order in response to a lawsuit in which the constitutionality of the law (which enjoys the presumption of being constitutional) was challenged. Second, yes - as I have previously stated - the law is the law until, if ever, it is determined to be unlawful by the judiciary. I disagree with the sheriff’s statements, just as I disagree with characterizing the legitimate process by which our laws are subject to review as chaos.
- H-W - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:18 am:
Looking at this dilemma from the opposite perspective, what might it look like if each sheriff were to say upon election, “I must enforce traffic laws, but that’s it. All other laws are optional, at my discretion. So here are the laws I will enforce over the next 4 years.”
That obviously would not fly, but that is exactly where we are. As a result, I think the legislature does in fact need to articulate new policy, obligating sheriffs to enforce all state laws.
- Chaos - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:22 am:
Sheriffs should enforce any law the General Assembly passes.
Anyone has the right to challenge a law as unconstitutional.
Most lawyers will try to file with a sympathetic judge.
The ILGA should not pass laws (with or without immediate effective dates) during a lame-duck session. However, when the ILGA does pass laws this way and a lawsuit is filed, chaos ensues.
- JS Mill - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:29 am:
=First, according to the post, the putative chaos was alleged to have been caused by a “local judge”, who was issuing an order in response to a lawsuit in which the constitutionality of the law (which enjoys the presumption of being constitutional) was challenged.=
Yep, the judge’s ruling has/will create chaos due the fact that it is limited to a small group. Pretty obvious actually. Is FB down today?
- TNR - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:34 am:
== “All they are saying…” ==
Kaitschuk trying to soft-pedal the rhetoric from his sheriff association members. Can’t say that I blame him. He knows the partisan bomb-throwing will make the sheriffs as relevant in Springfield as the Chicago FOP.
- Huh? - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:38 am:
I wonder if the recalcitrant sheriff’s will have a change of mind if something disastrous occurred while a deputy was serving a warrant.
- JS Mill - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:50 am:
=NO one and I mean NO is selling switches as an FFL.=
So the gun lovers are absolutely positive and omniscient in their knowledge of what “FFL’s” are doing 24/7.
Hmm, I find the absolutism of these goodly folks dubious at best.
Because SOMEBODY is selling “switches” and they are ending up on the streets. That fact IS an absolute truth.
And, these FFL’s are allowing straw purchases. so there is that.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/man-indicted-allegedly-straw-purchasing-27-handguns-stores-chicago-suburbs-0
- Steve - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 11:51 am:
-The tactic of being a “sanctuary” for not enforcing laws is dangerous.-
You are right only in a certain sense. Local government doesn’t have to help ICE enforce immigration law. But, by not helping local government the risk for ICE raids at local court houses can happen without heads up from ICE.
- 40,000 ft - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:02 pm:
The IL Supreme Court has obviously gone on winter vacation.
Have they even set a date to hear arguments about the “purge law?”
So much legislative cleanup, so little time on the calendar.
Maybe good faith negotiations between all would prevent this.
- Todd - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:05 pm:
JS –
even people with 07 Manf & SOTs are not doing it and we can make new machineguns.
In the gun world there has been a huge thing about these coming from Ebay and a few other places being shipped from China, just like suppressor parts/solvent traps and ATF has been all over this as is US Customs and Border/homeland security.
an FFL I know got a call about installing a switch and promptly hung up not knowing if it was a prank or a set up.
As for the article you mentioned, the individual was charged. no mention of shops doing something wrong. that was 27 guns over 2 years from 4 shops. so 6/7 guns from each shop over a two year time period isn’t un heard of and the shops would not know of the other purchases.
So what evidense do you have that they KNOWINGLY participated and knew it was a straw?
- rtov - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:05 pm:
“Maybe good faith negotiations between all would prevent this.” Exactly.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:08 pm:
===Maybe good faith negotiations between all would prevent this.===
That only works if the other side sees a ban can work, is constitutional, and isn’t seen as bad?
- Mason born - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:08 pm:
JS
I read your link, how exactly were those FFL’s suppose to know that the individual was lying on the federal form? The story does not list any of the FFL’s as complicit?
- Friendly Bob Adams - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:08 pm:
I’m very disappointed to have this guy as Sheriff of DuPage County. Who could have known he was a constitutional scholar?
I’ve lived in DuPage for 40 years, since every single elected official was an R, and the nice lady at the polling place told me “Be sure not to vote the wrong way” with a smile on her face.
The progress is DuPage is encouraging. I was a bit surprised that the Ds did not put up a candidate, but I’m sure they will next time. He’s gotta go.
- Donnie Elgin - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:16 pm:
“Maybe good faith negotiations between all would prevent this.”
The genesis of this bill was a “working group”. The group was completely one-sided - not a single advocate for or expert on individual 2A rights. The three hearings were completely controlled by Dems and only two panels were provided to those opposed to the bills. The final bill was made available with little more than 24 hours to go in the session. No one should be surprised at the chaos.
Rep. Bob Morgan (D-Deerfield) was chosen to lead the working group focused on firearm safety and reforms. Morgan will work with Representatives La Shawn Ford (D-Chicago), Jennifer Gong-Gershowitz (D-Glenview), Sonya Harper (D-Chicago), Barbara Hernandez (D-Aurora), Maura Hirschauer (D-Batavia), Jay Hoffman (D-Swansea), Nick Smith (D-Chicago), Denyse Stoneback (D-Skokie), Kathleen Willis (D-Addison), and Lance Yednock (D-Ottawa).
https://www.wifr.com/2022/07/26/illinois-house-democrats-launch-new-working-groups-addressing-top-issues/
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:18 pm:
If Chicago is allowed to be a sanctuary city and not enforce specific laws why can’t the counties? You can’t have it both ways just because you disagree with a specific stance.
- Stormsw7706 - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:23 pm:
Sheriffs are not kings but don’t tell them that. Hypocrites lamenting the loss of law and order and then crowing about how they won’t enforce laws they deem unconstitutional. Hypocritical in the extreme. If they can’t be voted out then the legislature needs to take actions to make them accountable. I’m sure they will crow that they were not consulted. Same story. Law enforcement obstructs legislation, refuses to enforce, legislature takes additional action, law enforcement crows they were not consulted, local TV news parrots their claims, and watered down legislation is produced. I’ve seen this show before. Please change the script
- H-W - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:24 pm:
@ 40,000 ft
There is no purge law.
- JS Mill - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 12:56 pm:
=So what evidense do you have that they KNOWINGLY participated and knew it was a straw?=
=The story does not list any of the FFL’s as complicit?=
There were multiple statements that heralded the infallibility of FFL’s. Those statements were absolute in their language.
I offered evidence that they are not, in fact, infallible.
KNOWINGLY, complicit, accidental, or any other motivation or intent is not relevant. The simple fact that they are fallible is what matters.
In this instance, they sold guns that made their way to the streets for crime.
You don’t think that somehow they could, in an amalgam, sell the components to make a weapon fully auto?
If that is your thought, you just are not thinking.
- Enemy of the State - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 1:12 pm:
I’m confused. Does not the State of Illinois ignore Federal laws regarding marihuana use, growth and distribution?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 1:24 pm:
===I’m confused===
These concepts are hard when Facebook thinking is at the root of the confusion.
It’s ok.
- Mason born - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 1:56 pm:
JS
With all respect there’s a pretty big difference between not knowing that someone lied on a form and sourcing, ordering, stocking, and selling an illegal item. Esp an illegal item that would get your business shuttered and prison time.
It’s less that FFL’s never make mistakes but more there’s no mistake tk make that’s intentional criminal action to sell a switch.
- JS Mill - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 5:39 pm:
@ Mason Born- with respect you probably know not all FFL holders are retail operations.
I would be willing to bet some of them are doing things they shouldn’t. Intentional or not.
That was my point. The idea that none have ever gone astray is just not accurate.
- Spooky32 - Monday, Jan 23, 23 @ 9:15 pm:
Statewide Chaos from a local judge? What does that mean? Every judge in this state can make rulings that impact the rest of the state. If a cook county judge made a ruling like this would that be ok then? Also, where was the uproar when Sheriff Tom Dart wouldn’t follow lawful court orders. Oh yeah he also worked to change the law to reduce the opponents against him last cycle.