EAST ST. LOUIS – Gun owners and dealers suing in U. S. district court for an injunction against Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s gun law found a friend in the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association.
Association counsel Michael Rice of Chicago moved for leave to file a brief as “amicus curiae,” or friend of the court, on Feb. 27.
“The association supports efforts to make Illinois and all of its citizens safe, but it also recognizes that those efforts must be within the bounds set by the Constitution,” he wrote.
Rice wrote that Illinois sheriffs are required to take an oath stating, “I will support the Constitution of the United States.”
He wrote that open and obvious disregard of the Second Amendment puts law enforcement officials in an untenable position.
He added that attorney general Kwame Raoul didn’t consent to the association’s motion and reserved the right to move to strike the brief.
The brief would support plaintiffs in four constitutional challenges that district judge Stephen McGlynn consolidated into a single proceeding on Feb. 24.
Pritzker’s law outlaws the manufacture, sale, and purchase of guns it defines as "assault weapons."
Later this year, it will ban possession of such firearms unless owners register them for $25 and abide by various restrictions.
It bans magazines with capacity of more than ten rounds for long guns and 15 for handguns.
According to Rice, the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association has assisted sheriffs with training, communication, and resources since 1928.
He wrote that it has more than 40,000 citizens, business leaders, and law enforcement personnel as members.
He wrote that it promotes sound legislation to help officers and serve the public.
Rice also wrote that compelling law enforcement members to take actions contrary to rights of citizens makes their mission more difficult.
He cited a Supreme Court decision from 2008, finding a ban on an entire class of arms that Americans overwhelmingly chose for a lawful purpose ran afoul of the Constitution.
He wrote that Pritzker’s law bans firearms and magazines that law abiding citizens commonly use for lawful purposes, directly contrary to the 2008 decision.
He challenged a narrative that the law is a necessary step in the fight against crime.
“The fundamental protection afforded by the Second Amendment does not allow for bypassing that protection simply because the government thinks that is the better approach,” he wrote.
Rice wrote that moreover, the rationale for the ban isn’t well supported.
He wrote that while the prevalence of firearms within the law’s ban has increased, the number of violent crimes has decreased.
He added that the violent crime rate in 1991 was 1,039 per 100,000 population, and the rate dropped to 404 per 100,000 in 2018.
Rice also wrote that research shows more than two thirds of police officers in the United States oppose bans on so called "assault weapons."
Rice’s colleague Katie Colopy also worked on the brief.