Illinois Supreme Court Axes 1000ft from Park Rule

At least some courts have been willing to take the Second Amendment seriously. As Dave Hardy mentions, we’re getting so many new levels of scrutiny from the Second Amendment, one can hardly keep up with them all. But at least the Illinois Supreme Court was willing to entertain the idea that the Second Amendment deserves something better than a dressed up version of rational basis review.

Eugene Volokh’s analysis can be found here. The court seems to have correctly discerned that the reason for such a law has more to do with discouraging people from exercising their rights than with public safety.

5 thoughts on “Illinois Supreme Court Axes 1000ft from Park Rule”

  1. WTF is an “elevated intermediate scrutiny” anyway? Is that when the judge pushes their reading glasses most of the way up their nose before reading the briefs, or what?

      1. Judges would never work backwards from their desired policy result in their rulings, of course. NEVER!

  2. A court does its job! It’s amazing!

    And the fact that the court correctly determined that the policy goal was to discourage legal guns and had nothing to with “public safety” (which is pretty much the point of most gun control) is the most amazing part.

  3. My guess with “heightened intermediate scrutiny” is that it is a legal theory that will allow a federal court to allow all the other restrictions justified under the intermediate scrutiny two step to stand without going to strict scrutiny. Because if the feds uphold this on regular intermediate scrutiny it will logically imperil other gun laws.

Comments are closed.