The Second Amendment Foundation issued this release about their win today in the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision by Judge Sykes also said that organizational plaintiffs like SAF had standing to sue on behalf of their members.<\/p>\n
BELLEVUE, WA \u2013 In a 3-0 ruling issued this morning, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has reversed a lower court ruling and ordered that court to issue a preliminary injunction against the City of Chicago on behalf of the Second Amendment Foundation that prevents the city from banning gun ranges inside city limits.<\/p>\n
\nJoining SAF in the original lawsuit were Action Target, Inc., the Illinois State Rifle Association and three Chicago residents, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen and Joseph Brown. Their attempts to obtain a temporary restraining order against the gun range ban were twice rejected by the district court. The Appeals Court ruling is severely critical of the lower court\u2019s ruling.<\/p>\n
\n\u201cThis is a significant victory that could have strong implications well beyond the Chicago city limits,\u201d said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. \u201cThe court is making it clear that cities cannot adopt firearms ordinances that are so deliberately restrictive that they make it impossible for citizens to exercise their rights under the Second Amendment.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nImmediately after last year\u2019s landmark SAF victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the city adopted a handgun ordinance that required special permits and mandated range training, but banned gun ranges inside city limits. The city argued that citizens could fulfill their training requirement by visiting a suburban range. In today\u2019s ruling, written by Judge Diane S. Sykes, the Appeals Court observed, \u201cIt\u2019s hard to imagine anyone suggesting that Chicago may prohibit the exercise of a free-speech or religious-liberty right within its borders on the rationale that those rights may be freely enjoyed in the suburbs. That sort of argument should be no less unimaginable in the Second Amendment context.\u201d In a concurring opinion, Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner noted, \u201c\u2026the city may not condition gun ownership for self-defense in the home on a prerequisite that the City renders impossible to fulfill within the city limits.\u201d<\/p>\n
\n\u201cWhat the city tried to do, as the court ruling noted, was \u2018thumb its municipal nose at the Supreme Court\u2019,\u201d Gottlieb stated. \u201cCity governments, no matter how much they abhor the fundamental right of citizens to keep and bear arms, cannot use clever legal devices to prevent the exercise of that right. As Judge Rovner noted, \u2018the city must come to terms with that reality\u2019.\u201d <\/i><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n