While the Second Amendment Foundation and their legal paladin Alan Gura won McDonald v. Chicago at the Supreme Court, causing Chicago to redo its restrictive gun laws, even the new ones don't pass legal muster, the SAF believes, and has filed a new lawsuit challenging aspects of Chicago's post-McDonald gun laws. From SAF's press release:
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today filed a lawsuit in federal court against the City of Chicago's new gun ordinance, asserting that "by banning gun ranges open to the public…under color of law," the city is depriving citizens of their right to keep and bear arms in violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Joining SAF in this lawsuit are the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), Action Target, Inc., and three individual plaintiffs including a retired Chicago police detective. They are represented by attorneys Alan Gura of Virginia and David Sigale of Chicago, who teamed up with SAF and ISRA on the landmark case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, which incorporated the Second Amendment to the states, effectively striking down Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban.
"While the city has adopted new regulations that make it legal to own handguns," said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, "they have crafted this new ordinance to make it virtually impossible for prospective gun owners to meet all legal requirements unless they travel outside the city for mandatory training. The new ordinance prohibits public gun ranges inside the city yet the city demands that handgun owners get at least one hour of range training time.
"This is a 'Catch-22' scenario," he continued, "that seems deliberately designed to discourage Chicago residents from exercising their firearm civil rights barely two months after those rights were restored by the Supreme Court."
A forthcoming issue of Reason magazine features a cover story by me detailing the history and implications of McDonald v. Chicago. And we've already done plenty of coverage of the case as it unfolded.