Legal News

Illinois Supreme Court Strikes down State’s Gun Law
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

On Friday, the Illinois Supreme Court published its opinion in the matter of Illinois v Aguilar striking down the gun law in the state that prohibits carrying firearms. The High Court opined that the law was against the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

In the instant case, Alberto Aguilar was arrested for criminal conduct not related with guns, but was found in possession of a gun on his person. He was convicted of carrying a firearm.


In striking down Aguilar’s conviction, the Illinois Supreme Court cited US Supreme Court decisions, notably those in D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. The court also observed that in Moore v. Madigan, the Seventh Circuit had held that the Second Amendment right to carry firearms extends to carrying firearms in public and away from home.

The Illinois High Court thus held, that under established precedents, including those of the US Supreme Court and that of the Seventh Circuit, the current gun laws in Illinois were unconstitutional.

However, the court added that the ownership of guns is “subject to meaningful regulation.” Even though, the Illinois legislature has recently passed a new law that allows people to carry firearms under restrictions, the court noted that the new law does not apply to the instant case as it is yet to come into effect.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!

Right now, the new gun law in Illinois will come into effect next year, but the current law, as far as it prohibits carrying firearms, has been declared unconstitutional.

While rejecting the state’s objection to the defendant’s challenge of his conviction as depriving him of his rights under the Second Amendment, the court observed, “If anyone has standing to challenge the validity of these sections [the sections in the defendant was convicted under] it is defendant. Or to put it another way, if defendant does not have standing to challenge the validity of these sections, then no one does.”





Search Now

Complex Litigation Attorney with 3-5 years of arbitration experience


Miami office of our client seeks complex litigation attorney with 3-5 years of law firm experience i...

Apply Now

Senior Business & Commercial Litigation Attorney


Irvine office is seeking a business and commercial litigation attorney with 5+ years of experience. ...

Apply Now

Commercial Litigation Attorney with 1-3 years of experience


Dallas office of our client seeks litigation attorney with 1-3 years of experience. The candidate wi...

Apply Now

Labor and Employment Attorney with 3-4 years of litigation experience

USA-CA-Los Angeles

Los Angeles office of our client seeks labor and employment attorney with 3-4 years of litigation ex...

Apply Now


Legal Assistant


Job Summary Full-time, administrative support position at boutique downtown law firm. Position...

Apply now

Business Law Associate | Burlington


Downs Rachlin Martin is seeking an attorney with 4 to 8 years of experience to join its very busy pr...

Apply now

Business Law Junior Associate | Burlington, VT


Downs Rachlin Martin seeks associate attorney with 1-3 years of experience to join its Commercial an...

Apply now

Legal Assistant- Bilingual

USA-NV-Las Vegas

Prestigious personal injury firm seeks superstar BILINGUAL legal assistant! Candidate MUST have...

Apply now

Most Popular


To Top