Posted: 15 Jul 2013 02:03 PM PDT
Defendents' argument that there is substantial reason to discriminate against nonresidents who apply for a FOID is eviscerated by this statutory change. See Pl's Mot. for Summ. J. at 15-18. There is no rational justification for issuing a permit to "carry a loaded...concealed firearm," to nonresidents, 430 ILCS 66/10(c), yet at the same time deny nonresidents a FOID - and thereby deny the right to possess a functional firearm only in a home. Accordingly, the de facto residency requirement imposed by 430 ILCS 65/4(a-5) and the explicit residency requirement at 430 ILCS 65/4(a)(2)(xiv) and 430 ILCS 65/8(q) are unconstitutional.
The Second Notice concludes that the FOID Act residency requirement is a "fixed harm" that inflicts "irreparable injury.
Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610