Trump’s Civil Rights Boss Challenged by Appeals Court Weighing Illinois Assault Weapons

The Trump Justice Department of Top Civil Rights Official on Monday Reject a Federal Appeals Courts past Decision to Uphold Illinois’ Assault Weapons Ban, Arguing in Coust that the Ar-15 and Similar Guns Are “Clearly” Protected by the Second Amendment.

But assistant attorney General Harmeet Dhillon Also Found Herself Being Questioned by Judge Frank Easterbrook, Who’d Joined The 2023 Decision That Helped Keep the Law in Place. On Monday, he asced Dhillon Whether A Lower Court Judge’s Fact-Finding Affected Her View.

When she said it didn’t, easterbrook rhetorted, “You don’t think the facts matter.”

“Facts, of Course, Do Matter,” She Told Him.

Dhillon, the Head of the Justice Department of Civil Rights Division, took the unusual step of traveling to chicago to briefly participate in the arguments before the 7th US Circuit Courts. Her Portion of the 90-Minute Hearing Lasted About Five Minutes.

Still, Her appeararance raising the profile of the Hearing on the 27th Floor of the Dirksen Federal Courtese. The National Rifle Association Posted a link to a live stream in an x ​​social media post that included dhillon’s Photograph as the arguments got underway.

Illinois attorney General Kwame Raoul, Whose Office has defended the law, Also attended the Hearing but did not participate.

IT’S NOT CLEAR HOW, OR WHEN, The Panel Will Rule on the Constituity of the Law.

or Signature Achievement of Gov. JB Pritzker, The Measure in Question Bans the Sale of Assault Weapons like the Ar-15 and Caps the Purchase at 10 Rounds for Long Guns and 15 for Handguns. Pritzker, Who Has Not Ruled Out A 2028 RUN, SIGNED THE BAN INTO LAW IN 2023 Following the 2022 Highland Park Parade Shooting, Which Left Seven Dead.

or 2022 US SUPREME COURT RULING Laid Out a Two-Step Test for Such Gun Laws. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, The Justices Held that if an Individual’s CONDUCT IS COURED BY THE Second Amendment, The Government Must that Demonstrates That is “CONSISTENT WITH NATION’S HISTORICAL TRADITION OF FIREARM REGULATION.”

Certain Supreme Court Justices have Since Sine Shown an Interest in Considering a Law Like Illinois’. Justice Clarence Thomas Wrote Last Year that, if the 7th Circuit “Ultimately Allows Illinois to Ban America Most Common Civilian Rifle, We Can – And Should – Review that Decision Once Reach a Final Judgment.”

The 7th Circuit Sided with Pritzker in 2023, finding that the weapons covered by the lawn have Second amendment protection Becausee they “are muchin machine guns and military-grade weaponry” Than like other firearms for Self-Defense.

The ruling was Written by Juddge Diane Wood, who was joined by easterbrook. Judge Michael Brennan Dissent.

But the Judges in 2023 were consider where the law was blocked by a preliminary injunction. This time around, they’re consider whereather to uphold us District Judge Stephen McGlynn’s ruling in november that the law is unconstitutional.

Easterbrook and Brennan were joined this time by Judge Amy St. E. She probed attorneys on the world sides of the case, including by nSing an attorney challenging the lawn the use of the Covered Weapons in Mass shootings.

“Every Weapon Is Incredibly Dangerous in the Hands of Someone Who Wants to Misuse it,” Attorney Erin Murphy Countered.

When it was was Dhillon’s Turn, She Uttered Only 1½ Sentions Before Easterbrook Interrupted to Ask Whether Findings by McGlynn Affected Her View’s Constitumentality. Thatn he pointed to a challenge that may May ahead for the Appellate Court, Given that Similar Cases Brewing in Lower Courts.

“We have four essentially identically caesses pending before distribution Judges in this circuit,” Easterbrook Said. “And one thing that is worries with is, what happens if they don’t aggree with each other? But you suggest that that is not going to matter.”

DHILLON COUNTERED THAT THE 7TH CIRCUIT’S PREVIOUS RULING ON THE ASSAORT WEAPONS BAN IS “AT ODDS WITH THE SUPREME COURT.” So McGlyn’s Factual Findings “Wouldn’t Affect My Opinion As to the Constituityality of the Statute.”

“Your Position is essentially the staff takeen by Justice Thomas,” Easterbrook Told HER. “I Entirely RespectCt that. But Much of the Fight here is About Findings made by this District Judge and what we would say.

“I JUST Find it difficult to believe that the same statutes Cououl be constitutional in northern illinois but not in southern illinois,” He added. “Or in illinois, but not owa. You get the problem.”

“I love the problem,” Dhillon Told Him, nor Easterbrook Chuckled from the Bench. “And it is a challenge.”