法官裁定伊利诺伊州公共交通携带枪支禁令违宪
Judge Rules Illinois Public Transit Firearms Carry Ban Unconstitutional

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/judge-rules-illinois-public-transit-firearms-carry-ban-unconstitutional

根据最高法院最近 2022 年的裁决(NYSRPA 诉 Bruen),美国地区法官宣布伊利诺伊州禁止在公共交通和设施中携带枪支的禁令违宪。 该决定引用了最高法院的裁决,即携带武器的权利包括在公共场合携带手枪的能力,受到第二修正案的保护。 伊利诺伊州的判决认为,该州无法阻止持有隐蔽携带许可证的人在 CTA 和 Metra 等公共交通工具上携带枪支。 法官声称,将所有公共区域视为“敏感”场所几乎可以证明所有枪支限制都是合理的,并且将违反最高法院的 2022 年标准。 他还提到,第二修正案仅保障政府免受政府入侵,但不保障私人实体的入侵。 该裁决仅影响涉案的四名主要原告,并没有推翻伊利诺伊州公共交通中的全面枪支禁令。 该诉讼由芝加哥地区的三名居民和迪卡尔布县的一名持有隐藏携带许可证的个人发起。 被告包括伊利诺伊州各县的多位州检察官以及伊利诺伊州总检察长夸梅·拉乌尔 (Kwame Raoul)。 原告在诉状中辩称,该禁令限制了他们在使用公共交通工具时的自卫权,而被告则辩称该法律确保了公共安全。 潜在上诉和进一步行动的结果仍不确定。

相关文章

原文

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal judge recently ruled that Illinois’s ban on carrying guns in public transportation and in transportation facilities is unconstitutional, citing the Supreme Court’s 2022 landmark decision.

A customer shops for a pistol in Tinley Park, Ill., on Dec. 17, 2012. Scott Olson/Getty Images

“After an exhaustive review of the parties’ filings and the historical record, as required by Supreme Court precedent, the Court finds that Defendants failed to meet their burden to show an American tradition of firearm regulation at the time of the Founding that would allow Illinois to prohibit Plaintiffs—who hold concealed-carry permits—from carrying concealed handguns for self-defense onto the CTA and Metra,” U.S. District Judge Iain D. Johnston wrote in his Aug. 30 opinion, referring to two Chicago-area transportation systems.

The judge was cited the Supreme Court’s decision, N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which found a New York law unconstitutional and that the ability to carry a pistol in public was a right guaranteed under the Second Amendment. The decision also said that, in future decisions, the judiciary should evaluate firearms regulations in light of the “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

Under the Supreme Court’s 2022 standard for seeing whether firearms regulations fall under the Constitution, the government must demonstrate that the measure is within U.S. historical traditions.

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

He also rejected Illinois state attorneys’ arguments that the Bruen test did not apply in this case because the state, which owns the property, can regulate what individuals take onto its property.

“[I]ndividual rights isn’t nullified on public property,” he wrote.

Further, he added that the court found that the Second Amendment only “protects against governmental—not private—intrusion on rights and liberties.”

His ruling applies only to four named plaintiffs in the case, meaning that it did not strike down the gun ban in public transit in the state.

The lawsuit was brought by three Chicago-area residents and one individual from DeKalb County who hold concealed carry licenses, according to court papers.

The defendants in the case are Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, DeKalb County State’s Attorney Rick Amato, DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin, Cook County State’s Attorney Kimberly Foxx, and Lake County State’s Attorney Eric Rinehart.

In their 2022 filing, the plaintiffs argued that “because the public transportation carry ban prohibits persons from carrying a firearm while accessing public transportation, the ban severely restricts plaintiffs from exercising their right to self-defense outside of the home.”

This directly violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution as held by the U.S. Supreme Court” in the Bruen and other ruling, they wrote.

Raoul had responded earlier this year in court papers saying that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently establish that restrictions on their ability to carry firearms on public transportation infringed on their Second Amendment rights. He also argued that the law is needed to protect public safety.

“All this suit would achieve is shifting the nature of the criminal charge from one statute to another; the desired conduct would still be unlawful,” his office wrote.

The Epoch Times has contacted David Sigale, the plaintiffs’ attorney, as well as Raoul’s office for comment on the ruling. It’s not clear whether Raoul, Foxx, or the other defendants are planning an appeal of Johnston’s decision.

Over the past few years, several legal challenges have been filed against Illinois’ gun laws, including a law that was signed by Gov. JB Pritzker in January 2023 that banned what he describes as “assault weapons” such as AR-15-style rifles and a number of other semiautomatic firearms. In July, the Supreme Court decided not to take up a challenge to the law.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com