(The Center Square) – Monday is the deadline for the state of Illinois and local governments defending gun and magazine bans to file briefs in a federal appellate court. Another measure queued for the governor could also wind up in court.
Cases from the Southern and Northern district federal courts in Illinois were consolidated last month with an expedited briefing schedule throughout this month.
“Motions to extend these dates, or to allow late filings by amici curiae, will not be entertained,” said the order from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Oral arguments in Chicago are set for June 29. The case involves challenges from several gun-rights groups and individuals from across the state and includes direct challenges to bans in Naperville, Chicago and Cook County in addition to Illinois’ law.
While the state and local governments defend the gun control measure already on the books, Illinois legislators are poised to send Gov. J.B. Pritzker another bill some expect to be challenged.
House Bill 218 opens the gun industry up to potential lawsuits from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul. Raoul told a Senate committee the measure would hold the firearms industry liable when they knowingly endanger the public with firearms sales, among other things.
“It prohibits marketing that reasonably appears to support unlawful paramilitary or unlawful private militia activities in Illinois,” Raoul said.
Pritzker signaled he will sign the bill.
“This legislation finally protects Illinoisans from predatory actions by the firearms industry,” Pritzker said in a statement after the measure cleared the Illinois Statehouse. “I intend to sign this bill into law and clarify the Attorney General’s ability to hold reckless manufacturers and advertisers accountable for their actions.”
Another gun-control measure didn’t advance.
House Bill 676, proposes a variety of changes, including a task force to evaluate mandating insurance for gun owners. While it passed the House, It did not advance in the Senate before legislators left for the summer.
Kirk Evans with U.S. Law Shield said their service provides participants who pay a monthly fee an attorney “from start to finish” if they use a firearm for self defense. That’s different from what may be speculated in a mandate. Evans said such liability insurance may be hard to find.
“It would be years. For instance, in California there’s a jurisdiction that mandated insurance,” Evans told WMAY. “No policies available and in order to get a policy administered there you’re probably looking at a one- to two-year process.”
Last month, a New Jersey federal judge blocked that state’s requirement for firearms owners to get liability insurance.
This article First appeared in the center square