*** UPDATE *** The Illinois State Rifle Association, along with the Second Amendment Foundation and others has filed a motion for preliminary injunction with the Southern District US Court. Click here to read it.

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* More on that NRA lawsuit from the Sun-Times…

Two Second Amendment lawyers who helped win a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a New York concealed carry gun law are now challenging the constitutionality of Illinois’ assault weapons ban — with help from the National Rifle Association.

Paul Clement, who successfully argued the New York case, is one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs in the latest federal lawsuit seeking to overturn Illinois’ two-week old ban.

Clement is a former partner in Kirkland & Ellis’ Washington, D.C., office who served as solicitor general of the United States, representing the government in cases before the nation’s top court from 2004 to 2008, during the George W. Bush administration. […]

Clement and attorney Erin Murphy began their own firm after Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis decided it would no longer handle Second Amendment-related litigation. Murphy, who was part of the New York case, is also working on the challenge to Illinois’ assault weapons ban, filed Tuesday in the Southern District of Illinois.

You can read the lawsuit by clicking here.

* Also…

An emergency hearing is scheduled for Thursday morning for a second lawsuit against House Bill 5471.

The lawsuit calls the ban unconstitutional and an attack on citizens’ right to bear arms. Tom DeVore, the former Republican candidate for state attorney general, is the plaintiff in the case, and he is joined by former gubernatorial candidate Darren Bailey. Last week, a judge in Effingham County granted a temporary restraining order blocking the law.

* While he’s an opponent of the new law, Livingston County State’s Attorney Randy Yedinak told the Pontiac Daily Leader that the written public statements by dozens of county sheriffs vowing not to enforce the law wer unwise…

“I do think there’s a little bit of danger in people making these statements about whether they will or will not enforce the law, or they will or will not charge people,” Yedinak said. “That’s giving up the very discretion they have to use. We saw it a lot during COVID when the governor was passing all sorts of legislation and people were just banging on my door, hounding me on the phone to say that I’m not going to enforce these COVID laws.

“We had one particular person running around here in Pontiac (who tested positive for COVID and said) he was going to cough on as many people (as he could). If I would have gone on record and said I wasn’t going to enforce those laws, then I wouldn’t be able to do something about that guy. That’s something a lot of state’s attorney’s recognize and that’s why you don’t see a lot of state’s attorneys making these statements because there maybe a situation where we want to enforce these brand new laws.”

* Meanwhile, “Steven in Pecatonica” called in to Brian Mackey’s 21st Show today to chime in on the assault weapons ban…

Steven in Pecatonica: I’m calling to see if I could speak to what the gentleman was discussing in terms of the implementation of the law. It’s my understanding that my hometown Dixon, Illinois, county seat of Lee County, recently just this last week had a demonstration for law enforcement officers, showing them what amounted to an armored skid steer that they were being directed, they’re being told that this was going to be used for the implementation of this law. That goes in contrary to what the gentleman just said.

Brian Mackey: All right. Thank you for that. A skid steer. I guess that’s like a piece of heavy equipment, full bulldozer like thing. Sheriff Dart, are you hearing anything about this?

Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart: Absolutely not. I mean, that would be contrary to literally every type of law enforcement doctrine that we have. I would imagine it would be something similar to what I said earlier about going to people with revoked FOID cards, where you attempt to approach, knock on the door and see if they are aware of the law and all these other things. That’s been the normal approach that people would take. It would be literally contrary to every law enforcement doctrine I can think of to use something like that.

Brian Mackey: Kathleen Sances, I can’t remember if it was you or one of the other guests who mentioned misinformation from people who are advocating for a broader view of gun rights. Say more about what your perspective is on that.

Kathleen Sances with GPAC: The sheriff touched on this. Nothing in this bill says that we’re going to knock on your door and take your existing collection of weapons and if you do have existing weapons, you have almost a year to get them registered. So I think that that’s the disinformation we’re talking about. This whole notion of confiscation is a typical gun lobby talking point. The gun lobby is motivated by the greed of the gun manufacturers who are worried about their profits. And you know, on the other side, our coalition is a movement of survivors, advocates, policy experts, faith leaders and youth who are motivated to keep our families and communities safe. And we’re going to continue to do so. We’re going to stand up and fight against this disinformation.

Not sure where Steven in Pecatonica got his info, but there’s nothing on the Lee County sheriff’s Facebook page, nothing in the Google and I searched a couple of social media sites and found nothing there, either. Maybe some of you can help track down this rumor.

…Adding… Just as an FYI, the SAFE-T Act prohibits purchases of these tracked armored vehicles.

* Gun rights advocate Todd Vandermyde was on the same show today and said this…

They simply want to make it impossible for people on the South Side, people on the West Side to be able to obtain a firearm either through regulations, red tape, fees, or whatever. This is your modern Jim Crow law.

Um, OK.

* Press release…

Attorney General Kwame Raoul and Attorney General for the District of Columbia Brian Schwalb led a coalition of 18 attorneys general asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit to reverse a lower court decision that enjoined New York’s prohibition on carrying firearms in places of worship and religious observation. In an amicus brief, Raoul and the coalition argue that the prohibition is consistent with U.S. Supreme Court precedent and with a long tradition of similar regulations designed to meet the states’ responsibility to protect their residents from the harmful effects of gun violence.

The coalition argues that states have an interest in limiting the possession and use of firearms in locations where people exercise other constitutionally protected rights, where vulnerable populations like children and older adults gather, and where large groups of people meet in confined spaces. Locations like churches, synagogues, and mosques are the heart of many people’s religious exercise. The brief notes that they are also increasingly targets of gun violence, which may dissuade people from attending religious services and otherwise exercising their First Amendment rights.

“States have the authority to craft policies that best protect their residents from gun violence – including those restricting firearms in places where large groups of people gather in confined spaces to exercise their constitutional right to observe their religious beliefs,” Raoul said. “States’ long-standing authority to tailor firearm regulations to local nuances is essential for policymakers to be able to address gun violence and keep their communities safe.”

The brief explains that though the U.S. Supreme Court recently altered the judicial analysis for Second Amendment claims in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the court’s decision did not upend the states’ long-standing authority to regulate the carrying of firearms in certain places. The court reaffirmed in Bruen that the Second Amendment has never given Americans an unrestricted right to carry loaded firearms in all public places. Instead, states may enact a variety of regulations to combat the problem of gun violence, including solutions tailored to local needs.