A federal judge has ruled Illinois’ ban on so-called assault weapons is unconstitutional.

The Protect Illinois Communities Act, or PICA, has since 2023 banned assault weapons, as well as 15-round handgun magazines and 10-round long-gun magazines.

Gun owners argue the ban infringes on their constitutional right to bear arms. Gun control advocates argue the ban is common sense and a way to protect Illinois residents from guns that are designed to be extra lethal.

The ruling came Friday in a 168-page document by U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn. He granted the injunction sought by numerous plaintiffs — including gun store owners, gun rights advocacy groups and private individuals — who argued PICA is not constitutional.

The law was created after a shooter used an AR-15-style rifle to kill seven people at a Highland Park Fourth of July parade in 2022.

Read More:

• Federal Judge Rules Illinois Assault Weapons Ban Unconstitutional
• Which Guns Are Covered by Illinois’ Assault Weapons Ban?

“I think going back to Judge McGlynn’s 168-page opinion, he states very plainly that, yes, sympathy is due to the people who are injured, maimed or have loved ones injured or maimed in high-profile mass shootings, but this doesn’t give you the pretext to strip the law-abiding rest of society of their rights and property and their important right to self-defense just because of the depraved acts of a deranged individual,” said Dan Eldridge, president of Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois. He’s among the gun shop owners suing Illinois in the federal case.

Eldridge described the ruling as a “strong win” and is looking toward next steps to ensure this ruling is permanent.

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed a notice of appeal with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday after McGlynn’s ruling was released. Eldridge said the appeal comes as no surprise.

“He knew what was going to happen, and he said, ‘We’re ready to go,’” said John Schmidt, a member of the Gun Violence Prevention PAC’s executive board and a former associate U.S. attorney general. “They’ll do a good job again in the court of appeals. I’m optimistic about the court of appeals. Courts of appeals don’t change their minds very often, although sometimes they do.”

Schmidt was not surprised by McGlynn’s ruling, saying it was predictable because the judge showed the same pattern a year and half ago. After the statute was passed, he enjoined it.

In April 2023, McGlynn granted a temporary injunction blocking enforcement of the law while the case proceeded, saying he believed the plaintiffs were likely to win on the merits of their case — meaning the law would likely be found unconstitutional.

But the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals quickly reversed that ruling and lifted the injunction. And in a 2-1 ruling in November 2023, the court sided with two other district court judges in Chicago, holding the law likely does not infringe on the Second Amendment and allowing enforcement of the law to continue.

Schmidt believes McGlynn’s ruling will be reversed again and doesn’t anticipate the case going further. However, Eldridge believes the 7th Circuit will have its work cut out this time around.

“I think that there is some chance that we win at the panel,” Eldridge said. “We don’t know the composition of the panel right now because Judge Wood retired from the bench. But right now, that panel is 50-50. It’s Eastbrook, and it’s Judge Brennan who wrote a very powerful dissent when the 7th ruled against us last summer.”

Eldridge also noted there is a chance of winning this case at the federal level if the U.S. Supreme Court takes up a case involving Maryland’s assault weapons ban. If the Supreme Court rules against Maryland, all state assault weapons bans will likely be shut down across the U.S.

“It’s a big first step whether the Supreme Court is going to take the case,” Schmidt said. “I know some of the gun rights lawyers have been going around saying they think they will. They were all saying that about our case. And no one except Justice Thomas wanted to take it.”

Schmidt said it’s unclear whether the Supreme Court will take on the Maryland case due to several previous similar cases that did not have desired outcomes for gun rights advocates. Schmidt recalled Justice Clarence Thomas being the sole dissenter in those cases as well.

As for now, PICA will remain in effect for 30 days after the judge’s ruling.

Matt Masterson and Capitol News Illinois contributed to this report.