Herrera v. Raoul

670 F.Supp.3d 665

Javier HERRERA, Plaintiff, v. Kwame RAOUL, in his official capacity as Attorney General for the State of Illinois,Brendan F. Kelly, in his official capacity as Director of the Illinois State Police,Cook County, a body politic and corporate, Toni Preckwinkle,in her official capacity County Board of Commissioners President, Kimberly M. Foxx,in her official capacity as Cook County State's Attorney,Thomas J. Dart, in his officialcapacity as Sheriff of Cook County, City of Chicago,a body politic and corporate, David O'Neal Brown,in his official capacity as Superintendent of Policefor the Chicago Police Department, Defendants.

No. 23 CV 532

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

Signed April 25, 2023

Consovoy McCarthy PLLC, Arlington, VA, Gregory Abbott Bedell, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff.

Christopher Graham Wells, Kathryn Hunt Muse, Keri L. Holleb Hotaling, Office of the Attorney General of Illinois, Chief, Public Interest Division, Chicago, IL, for Defendants Kwame Raoul, Brendan F. Kelly.

Jessica Megan Scheller, Jessica Wasserman, Megan Marie Honingford, Edward M. Brener, Prathima Yeddanapudi, Cook County State's Attorney, Civil Litigation Bureau, Chicago, IL, for Defendants Cook County, Toni Preckwinkle, Kimberly M. Foxx, Thomas J. Dart.

Andrew W. Worseck, Whitney Gorman Woodward, David Brandon Smith, City of Chicago Department of Law, Constitutional and Commercial Litigation Division, Chicago, IL, for Defendants City of Chicago, David O'Neal Brown.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Lindsay C. Jenkins, United States District Judge

Laws enacted by the City of Chicago, Cook County, and, most recently, the State of Illinois restrict Illinois residents' ability to possess or purchase certain firearms and large-capacity magazines (defined as more than ten rounds for a semiautomatic rifle and more than fifteen rounds for a handgun). Javier Herrera, a Chicago resident, local emergency room doctor, and owner of several restricted firearms and large-capacity magazines, sued the City of Chicago, Cook County, and the State of Illinois, alleging that these laws violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. [Dkt. No. 1]. He simultaneously moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to enjoin the enforcement of these laws. [Dkt. No. 4]. The Court held a hearing on April 17, 2023. [Dkt. No. 72]. For the reasons detailed below, Herrera's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction is denied. [Dkt. No. 4].

I. Background

A. Factual Background

In response to widespread mass shootings nationally, including the mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois on July 4, 2022, the State of Illinois passed the "Protect Illinois Communities Act," HB 5471 ("the Illinois Act"). Ill. Pub. Act 102-1116, § 1; [Dkt. No. 1 at ¶ 40]. The Illinois Act made three changes to state law at issue in this case.

Under the Act, Illinois residents can no longer carry, possess, or purchase certain "assault weapon[s]." 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(15)-(16). The Act defines an "assault weapon" to include various models of firearms with various features, including a "semiautomatic rifle" with a "pistol grip." 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(a)(1)(A)(i). This definition encompasses an AR-15 rifle. See 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(a)(1)(J)(ii)(II). Additionally, Illinois residents can no longer purchase or possess any "large capacity ammunition feeding device" ("large-capacity magazine"). 720 ILCS 5/24-1.10(a). For rifles, the Illinois Act defines a "large capacity ammunition feeding device" as a "magazine . . . that can [be] readily restored or converted to accept, more than [ten] rounds of ammunition." See 720 ILCS 5/24-1.10(a)(1). For handguns, it is defined as a magazine of more than fifteen rounds. Id. The restrictions on firearms and large-capacity magazines took effect on January 10, 2023. See 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. ("ILCS") 5/24-1.

The Illinois Act allows any owner of a restricted firearm who acquired the firearm prior to the Illinois Act's effective date to continue to lawfully possess that firearm if they provide an "endorsement affidavit" by October 1, 2023 ("registration requirement"). 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(d). The affidavit must include the affiant's Illinois firearm owner's identification ("FOID") number, an affirmation that the affiant lawfully owned the restricted firearm before October 1, 2023, and the make, model, caliber, and serial number of the restricted firearm. Id. Owners of restricted large-capacity magazines may similarly retain all magazines acquired before the effective date. See 720 ILCS 5/24-1.10(d). The Illinois Act does not allow for the purchase of new restricted weapons or large-capacity magazines after its effective date. See 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9(d); 720 ILCS 5/24-1.10(d).

The Illinois Act mirrors county and city enactments already in place.¹ See Cook County, Ill., Code §§ 54-210-215 (2006); Chi., Ill., Mun. Code §§ 8-20-010, 8-20-075, 8-20-85 (2013); see also Wilson v. Cook County, 937 F.3d 1028, 1029 (7th Cir. 2019). Since 2006, the Cook County Code ("County Code") has prohibited county residents from purchasing, carrying, or possessing certain semiautomatic rifles, including an AR-15 rifle, and large-capacity magazines, defined as any magazine that can accept more than ten rounds. Cook County, Ill., Code §§ 54-211(7)(A)(iii), 54-212(a). Owners of restricted firearms or large-capacity magazines who possessed either prior to the County Code's enactment are required to remove them from the county, render them "permanently inoperable," or surrender them to the Cook County Sheriff. Id. at § 54-212(c).

Since 2013, the City Code of Chicago ("City Code") similarly prohibited city residents from purchasing, carrying, or possessing certain semiautomatic rifles, which included the AR-15 rifle, and large-capacity magazines, defined as magazines of fifteen or more rounds for semiautomatic handguns and ten or more rounds for semiautomatic rifles. Chi., Ill., Mun. Code §§ 8-20-010(a)(10)(B)(ii), 8-20-075, 8-20-085. Much like the County Code, the City Code requires that all restricted firearms or large-capacity magazines possessed before the enactment date be disposed of or removed from city limits. Id. at §§ 8-20-075(c)(1), 8-20-085(b).

Plaintiff Javier Herrera is an emergency room doctor, Chicago resident, and owner of multiple firearms. [Dkt. No. 1 at ¶ 5]. Herrera owns a Glock 45, Glock 43x, and two AR-15 rifles. [Id. at ¶¶ 20, 23-24]. Herrera keeps his Glock 45 and Glock 43x at his Chicago home and his AR-15 rifle "beyond county lines." [Id. at ¶ 22-24]. Herrera alleges that he owns these firearms for self-defense, hunting, and sport shooting. [Id. at ¶¶ 19, 37]. Herrera has both a FOID card and a concealed carry license. [Id. at ¶¶ 5, 19, 23].

In addition to his day job, as of 2018, Herrera has served as a volunteer medic on a local Special Weapons and Tactics ("SWAT") team, which carries out high-risk law-enforcement missions. [Id. at ¶ 25]. As a volunteer medic, Herrera renders medical aid to SWAT team officers, bystanders, or anyone else who may be injured on these missions. [Id. at ¶ 28]. Herrera is not a law enforcement officer on the SWAT team and does not carry a firearm on these missions. [Id.] During his volunteer shifts, Herrera is stationed inside the command vehicle until called upon to render medical aid. [Id.] Herrera also attends monthly SWAT trainings, which include shooting drills. [Dkt. No. 5-1 at ¶ 10]. He has participated in these trainings in the past with his personal AR-15 to maintain confidence and proficiency with the weapon. [Id. at ¶¶ 10, 12].

B. Procedural Background

On January 27, 2023, Herrera sued Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Illinois State Police Director Brendan F. Kelly (the "State Defendants"), County Board of Commissioners President Toni Preckwinkle, Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx, Sheriff of Cook County Thomas J. Dart, Cook County (the "County Defendants"), Chicago Police Department Superintendent David O'Neal Brown, and the City of Chicago (the "City Defendants"). [Dkt. No. 1]. Herrera moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction the same day.² [Dkt. No. 4]. In his complaint, Herrera alleges that the City Code, County Code, and Illinois Act violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. [Dkt. No. 1 at ¶¶ 105-173]. Herrera charges that these laws infringe on his right to armed self-defense in several ways. [Id. at ¶¶ 97-103].

In particular, Herrera alleges that his right to self-defense is threatened by his inability to keep his AR-15 rifle, his Glock 45, or their accompanying standard magazine in his home due to the City and County Code. [Id. at ¶¶ 97-98]. As part and parcel of this harm, because Herrera cannot keep his AR-15 rifle in his home, he must commute over four hours round trip to complete shooting drills with his SWAT team. [Dkt. No. 1 at ¶¶ 31-34, 99; Dkt. No. 5-1 at ¶ 12]. Herrera contends that he must be prepared to handle or secure the AR-15 rifle of an injured officer in the event an officer hands that weapon to Herrera while the officer uses another tool. [Dkt. No. 5-1 at ¶ 8]. Herrera has not alleged that he has ever needed to handle the AR-15 of an injured officer or shoot such a weapon. [Dkt. No. 1, 5-1, 63-3]. But Herrera alleges that on one mission in 2021, a SWAT officer handed him an AR-15 rifle for him to secure. [Dkt. No. 63-3 at ¶ 13]. As a result, Herrera contends that he is effectively precluded from SWAT training shooting drills, given the long commute and his hours as an emergency doctor.³ [Dkt. No. 1 at ¶ 99; Dkt. No. 5-1 at ¶ 12].

Herrera further alleges injury from the inability to purchase additional AR-15 rifles, rifle components, or large-capacity magazines for any of his weapons in furtherance of his right to self-defense. [Dkt. No. 1 at ¶¶ 101-102]. Herrera argues that because certain large-capacity magazines come standard with his AR-15 rifle and Glock 45, his inability to purchase those...