EAST ST. LOUIS - Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois can move to enjoin registration of weapons and parts after the deadline passes on Jan. 1, U. S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn said at a hearing on Dec. 12.
McGlynn said enjoining the case on the spot might create more problems than it’s worth.
The deadline will arrive with emergency rules in place, revisions pending, and weak response from the state.
Federal Firearms Licensees counsel Sean Brady of California told McGlynn several thousand owners registered out of millions of Illinois citizens with firearm cards.
Brady said he understood that the legislature’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) took no action on possible revisions earlier that day.
“As of right now people are not on actual notice of what the actual rules are,” he said.
Brady said legislators gave state police an impossible task, “to implement this very arcane and vague and expansive law.”
He said state police tried to engage the public and address questions that continually come up.
McGlynn asked, “If it’s this confusing, how could they possibly be prosecuted?”
He added that if he enjoined it, people would say, “This was all going to work out just fine, then the federal courts stepped in, entered an injunction, and that’s what messed everything up.”
Brady said taking that view would involve real consequences for countless citizens.
He said people have a general idea of what assault weapon laws involve, “but here we are talking about registration of mere parts.”
He quoted the definition of adjustable stock and said, “How does one know if an item reduces the length of a weapon if it’s not attached to a weapon?”
McGlynn asked assistant attorney general Christopher Wells if an owner who registered a weapon but not a stock would violate the law.
Wells said, “You don’t have to separately register the individual parts.”
Brady added that rule wasn’t adopted through a rule making process.
“They are generally what we refer to as underground regulations that could be changed at any point,” he said.
Wells responded that Federal Firearms Licenses lacked standing because they admitted they had notice.
He said publication is all that due process requires and individual notice is not required.
“Ignorance of a statute is generally no defense to criminal prosecution,” he said.
“There is no evidence in the record of how many people even own assault weapons,” he added.
“It may be a lot less than plaintiffs think,” he continued.
Wells said people might transfer weapons out of state, sell them to a federal firearm licensee, or destroy them.
McGlynn said if he entered an injunction it would be immediately appealed, “and who knows when it’s going to be heard.”
He said he was inclined to deny it without prejudice to renewal in January.
McGlynn also said people try to read more into a Seventh Circuit decision than necessary.
He added that they didn’t decide on the merits.
“This is what we really need to do for the people of Illinois, to get some answers of what guns are protected, what things the state may outlaw without violating the Second Amendment rights, what constitutes a firearm,” he said.
Brady said if the Seventh Circuit upholds a ban on firearms, that’s a wholly distinct question from whether the parts are protected and whether they can be registered.
On Dec. 14, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request for an injunction from a Naperville gun shop owner and the National Association for Gun Rights.
Federal Firearms Licensees counsel Kostas Moros of California said a separate petition was pending at the Supreme Court to stay the Seventh Circuit’s decision.
McGlynn responded, “If the Supreme Court enters an order that says Steve McGlynn is a swell guy, I’ll buy the first round.”