Two major gun-rights organizations have filed a reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in a case challenging Illinois’ ban on the carry of firearms on public transportation.
On March 3, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed the brief in support of the cert petition in the case Schoenthal v. Raoul, which was originally filed in 2022 and challenges the state’s complete ban on carry on public transportation.
According to the SAF, in order to legally carry a firearm in Illinois, residents are required to obtain not only a Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID), but also a concealed carry license. However, even with both the FOID card and a carry license, Illinois still bans carrying a firearm on “…any bus, train, or form of transportation paid for in whole or in part with public funds, and any building, real property, and parking area under the control of a public transportation facility paid for in whole or in part with public funds.”
“One of the animating principles behind the Second Amendment is the ability to be armed in public in case of confrontation,” SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said in a news release announcing the filing. “The practical effect of banning carry on public transit is obvious—anyone who relies on it faces a de facto ban on their ability to carry anywhere. There is no historical support for the categorical ban of permitted carry on all public transportation, and without that the Second Amendment and Supreme Court have held that this law must be struck down.”
An Illinois district court originally granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the case, agreeing that the public transit carry ban was unconstitutional. On appeal, however, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling, allowing the ban to remain in place.
The brief states: “Such a rule is entirely inconsistent with the Second Amendment’s underlying principles. Illinois responds that this objection ‘merely begs the question’ because ‘this Court has instructed lower courts to look to history to determine those principles.’ But this Court already has defined the key principles underlying the right itself— which are founded on the basic, pre-existing right of self-defense. While this Court in Heller, Bruen, and Rahimi looked to historical restrictions to understand the principles underlying historically accepted forms of regulation, it did so while also respecting the principles underlying the right itself.”
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said that ultimately, the Supreme Court needs to hear the case and strike down the ban, since such laws do nothing to curb violent crime.
“There’s no doubt these ‘sensitive places’ laws do little in terms of thwarting criminals from carrying a firearm on public transit,” Gottlieb said. “In fact, the ban only forces peaceable citizens to disarm, leaving them and those around them more vulnerable to criminal violence. The Second Amendment equally protects your right to carry for self-defense, whether you take the train to work or drive your car.”
