By Greg Bishop | The Center Square
The Center Square

(The Center Square) – A gun rights advocate says that the U.S. Department of Justice coming to argue in front of an appeals court against Illinois’ gun ban is significant.

Oral arguments are scheduled for Sept. 22 in the case Barnett v. Raoul, challenging the state’s gun and magazine ban. A federal district court found the law unconstitutional last year after a four-day bench trial.

In the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the U.S. Department of Justice motioned to be allowed time to argue.

“This appeal concerns whether Illinois’s Protect Illinois Communities Act, which prohibits so-called ‘assault weapons,’ can withstand scrutiny under the Second Amendment, which protects Americans’ right to ‘keep and bear Arms,’” the motion said. “Because of the federal government’s interest in ‘protect[ing] the Second Amendment rights of all Americans,’ Executive Order No. 14,206, Protecting Second Amendment Rights, … the United States filed a brief as amicus curiae supporting Plaintiffs-Appellees. The United States believes that its participation in oral arguments will be helpful to the Court.”

The motion was granted.

Gun rights advocate Todd Vandermyde said it’s monumental.

“We have the United States Department of Justice not only filing an amici brief on behalf of the challenges to the Illinois gun ban, they have asked for time to come in and argue the government’s position,” Vandermyde told The Center Square.

The case is expected to go to the U.S. Supreme Court regardless of whether the appeals court sides with plaintiffs or with the state of Illinois.

How law enforcement interprets a recent appeals court ruling in a separate case challenging the prohibition of carrying concealed firearms on Illinois mass transit is still unclear.

The Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled earlier this month in the case Schoenthal v. Raoul, reversing a lower court and upholding the law.

“A concealed-carry licenseholder can keep his firearm with him as long as it is unloaded and secured during his time on public transit,” the court said. “Under Illinois’s regulation, a citizen can step off the transit system, reassemble their firearm, and go about their day with no further infringement on their rights.”

Vandermyde said this leaves open significant questions.

“What’s this going to look like when you have five, six, a dozen people waiting for the bus? And as the bus pulls up, they all reach under their coat or whatever, pull out a handgun, unload it, clear it, and then place it in a briefcase or purse or satchel or something like that, and then board the bus?” he asked.

The Cook County Sheriff’s Office said it would be “premature to comment on how any part of the decision would be enforced.”

“We understand the appellate court has not issued the appellate mandate for this decision and the decision remains pending,” the office said. “We intend to have discussions with the Attorney General’s and the State’s Attorney’s Offices regarding the procedural posture of this decision and when it will take effect, and what the practical effect of the decision will be on public safety and enforcement of the concealed carry laws of Illinois.”

Illinois State Police said the decision “does not change how Illinois law enforcement enforces conceal carry laws in the state.”

Vandermyde said he still doesn’t know.

“They didn’t give us any definitive, you know, ‘we’re going to arrest you if you do this.’ Well, if they come out and say that and they’ve effectively negated your ability to carry, you know, if you were forced to use public transit.”

Plaintiffs in the Schoenthal case said they are reviewing the decision on what their next steps will be.

###