* Tribune…

A federal judge in Rockford ruled it unconstitutional for Illinoisans with concealed carry permits to be prohibited from carrying guns on public transportation, a decision with uncertain implications for a decade-old state law.

The decision was a result of a 2022 lawsuit filed by four people who alleged the section of Illinois’ concealed carry law that bars holders of concealed carry licenses, or CCLs, from carrying the guns on public buses or trains violated their Second Amendment right to self-defense under the U.S. Constitution.

At issue in U.S. District Judge Iain Johnston’s ruling was a constitutional test requiring gun laws to be “historically” consistent with laws on the books in the 18th century, when the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms was written, or before that.

This arose from the landmark 2022 case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, in which the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative 6-3 majority established the new constitutional standard, which will also take center stage later this month when a federal judge representing southern Illinois hears arguments over the constitutionality of the state’s ban on so-called assault weapons. […]

On Monday, the plaintiffs’ attorney, David Sigale, welcomed the ruling and said that while its “technical impact is unclear” and mentions only his four clients, “the court’s analysis and ultimate declaration of unconstitutionality is arguably applicable to any CCL holder on any public transportation in Illinois.” Sigale still recommended that “until the judgment is final and the broader applicability is made clear,” CCL holders should continue to follow the law as written so they don’t have any trouble with authorities.

* Bloomberg…

The state first argued that the Bruen test was inapplicable, because the state, as a property owner can regulate what people bring on its property. Johnston rejected that argument, calling it “breathtaking, jawdropping, and eyepop-ping.” Among other things, he said that the “constitutional protection afforded to other individual rights isn’t nullified on public property.”

The plain text of the Second Amendment applies to the regulated conduct here, Johnston said. But the state didn’t provide any historical analogues to support the public transportation ban, he said.

The regulation of guns in crowded places in England and some US states, weren’t sufficient analogues, “because why they burdened the right to armed self-defense is not sufficiently similar” to the Illinois ban, Johnston said. An 1871 Texas law regulating handguns was an outlier and laws from several other states were insufficient to show a national tradition of handgun regulation to support the Illinois ban, he said.

Public transportation also isn’t a sensitive place where firearms can be regulated, Johnston said. Though trains and buses are moving vehicles with no escape, the state didn’t properly analogize them to enumerated sensitive places, such as government buildings and schools, or provide any evidence to support the creation of a new sensitive place category. he said.

Treating “any place where the government would want to protect public order and safety as a sensitive place casts too wide a net—this would seem to justify almost any gun restriction,” Johnston said.

* The opinion mentions Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx by name dozens of times. It also includes tons of footnotes, including this one…

Keeping in mind Justice Gorsuch’s explanation in his concurrence in Rahimi, this Court’s ruling is specific to the facts presented. See United States v. Rahimi, 144 S. Ct. 1889, 1909-10 (2024) (Gorsuch, J., concurring). “Trump-appointed judge allows firearms on Illinois public transit” is a likely chyron for this decision. That’s unfortunate. Federal judges—including those who will review this decision—engage in exacting, thoughtful, and careful analyses that are not results oriented or reducible to headlines and chyrons. We’re doing the best we can.

This is the same judge, by the way, who called a state law allowing lawsuits against crisis pregnancy centers under the state’s Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act “stupid.”

…Adding… Gov. Pritzker was asked today about the ruling…

Well, unfortunately, many of the conservative judges who’ve been appointed have misunderstood what it means to uphold public safety. And you know, we still believe in the Second Amendment. It’s part of the Constitution that you have rights as a result of the Second Amendment, but there are limitations to that. I mean, just to give one example, the right to bear arms. It’s not the right to a shoulder-fired missile, as one example. There are limitations on the kinds of weapons and the places that we need to, would we allow people to carry an AR 15 into the White House? No. So it’s clear that there are some misguided decisions that get made at the Circuit Court level, the federal court level, and I’m hoping that it will be overturned along the way, if it has to all the way the Supreme Court. It will be disappointing if they uphold this, but I’m hopeful that the law that was passed in Illinois a number of years ago, that’s frankly, done a lot to keep people safe, will be upheld.