Home Illinois News Second Amendment group applauds judge’s ruling on Deerfield semi-automatic ban

Second Amendment group applauds judge’s ruling on Deerfield semi-automatic ban


CHATSWORTH – The north suburban Village of Deerfield stepped beyond its authority as a municipality when it passed a ban on semi-automatic firearms and magazines, a Lake County judge ruled Friday.

Lake County Judge Luis Berrones ruled that the Village of Deerfield does not have the authority to ban semi-automatic firearms and magazines in their community, according to Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson. Pearson was instrumental in challenging the municipality’s ban.

“This is a big win for the Second Amendment,” Pearson said in a statement. “The Village of Deerfield had an opportunity to pass a ban in 2013 and failed to do so. Their ordinance is a clear violation of Illinois’ concealed carry law which was passed into law precisely because of the Supreme Court’s ruling on what municipalities could and could not do in terms of establishing their own gun laws.

"Today’s ruling reaffirms the US Supreme Court’s ruling and makes it clear that communities do not have the authority to enact more onerous gun laws than what is already codified in state statute," Pearson said. "This is a very good day for those of us that put a premium on the 2nd Amendment freedoms afforded to us in the Constitution.”

In 2018, the Village of Deerfield passed an ordinance banning certain semi-automatic firearms despite the fact an Illinois State law expressly prohibits municipalities from banning these types of firearms and magazines. The state law gave municipalities until July 19, 2013 to enact semi-automatic firearm bans.

The Village of Deerfield contended that because the ordinance was an amendment to a previous ordinance approved within the deadline the Legislature established, the ordinance should be legal. In his ruling, Judge Berrones determined Deerfield’s 2018 ordinance was a new ordinance and he stated gun owners have “a clearly ascertainable right to not be subjected to a preempted and unenforceable ordinance.”


  1. This and types of gun restrictions will need to go to SCOTUS
    And that is the only chance where large state Democrats control state and city government.
    Abortion, homosexual marriage are not mentioned in the Constitution and SCOTUS had no legal right to go there. But the 2nd Amendment is in the Constitution.

  2. Since abortion and homosexuals are not mentioned in the constitution SCOTUS also should not be able to invalidate state laws regarding these issues.
    It really shows that the constitution is not worth the paper it is written on once you import Third Worlders who do not share our history or values or heroes.

  3. The difference is that firearms are mentioned in the Constitution thus logic prevails that it falls under federal law and SCOTUS.
    Are you really certain that you want the states to do as they want on this issue? Think about it.

Exit mobile version