NRA Supports Guns Save Life’s Challenge to Illinois’ FOID Act

lady justice scaled blind illinois FOID card

Bigstock

By NRA-ILA

[ED: For background on this, read John Boch’s post on an earlier ruling that Illinois’ FOID card requirement is unconstitutional.]

Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today announced its support for a lawsuit challenging Illinois’s Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID) Act. The lawsuit was brought by Guns Save Life and a 84-year old Marine Corps veteran who is currently a member of Guns Save Life.

“The Illinois FOID Act infringes on law-abiding citizens’ fundamental right to self-protection,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA-ILA.

The FOID Act requires individuals to pass an extended background check, provide a photo, and pay a fee before being granted government permission to possess a firearm in their own home. Illinois gun owners must pay a fee and renew their FOID cards every 10 years. If the cards are stolen, the gun owner is forced to jump through additional hoops and burdened with more fees to exercise their constitutional right to self-protection.

Party to the suit is an 84-year-old Marine veteran and Guns Save Life member who lives alone and relies on his firearms for self-protection. After he forgot to renew his FOID card, the police came to his home and confiscated his guns thus leaving him defenseless.

“You shouldn’t need government permission to exercise a constitutional right, “ continued Cox. “The men and women of the National Rifle Association are pleased to join Guns Save Life in this fight to protect the rights of a distinguished combat veteran and all of the law-abiding gun owners in the great state of Illinois.”

comments

  1. avatar George Washington says:

    FIGHT THE INSANE POWER GRABS BY THE LIBERAL DISARMAMENT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX…..:)

  2. avatar GS650G says:

    Good luck with this one. They will point to Shicago as justification for FOID because they don’t know who pulls the triggers.

    1. avatar Tim says:

      The only hope for Illinois is to divorce itself from that dumpster-fire, ‘Chicago’.

      Step 1: build a wall around Chicago.
      Step 2: dowse the wall with gasoline & set it on fire.

      1. avatar Andrew Lias says:

        Why bother with the later steps? Gas is $$$ it’ll take care of its self if you wall it off.

  3. avatar Nanashi says:

    Translation: NRA wants to falsely claim credit for the work of Guns Save Lives like they have with Heller.

    1. avatar Reason says:

      I was wondering the same thing. Where the hell have they been for the last few decades? Someone else filed suit. Must look like they will win. Otherwise the NRA would be “keeping thier powder dry for a fight they can win”

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      “and only three weeks too late to matter”

    3. avatar pwrserge says:

      Different case.

    4. avatar Dan the Man says:

      Exactly, the NRA doesn’t support state gun rights organisations with money and legal help, only with lip service.

    5. avatar Todd says:

      To bad you don’t know the truth. NRA recruited GSL for the suit. Is was their initiative not the other way around

  4. avatar Cliff H says:

    It is impossible for even a layman to NOT see that this is a poll tax.

    This should have been challenged the day the Illinois governor signed it into law.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Poll taxes would be legal absent the 24th Amendment, though. Apparently the government is allowed to charge you for your Constitutional rights unless specifically prohibited.

      1. avatar Andrew Lias says:

        The ruling you’re looking for is Minneapolis Star Tribune Company v. Commissioner. Been out there a long damn time and should be extended to all rights.

        1. avatar Nanashi says:

          And Grosjean v. American Press Co
          “The tax in question is not an ordinary form of tax, but one single in kind, with a long history of hostile misuse against the freedom of the press. “

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Hannibal,

        I believe the only taxing authority that our federal government has is excise tax on goods and services and then “income” tax via the 16th Amendment.

        If that is correct, then our federal government has no legitimate authority to institute a poll tax.

        Having said all that, I am having a hard time finding any reason why a state cannot institute a tax on anything and everything, as long as a state’s constitution does not forbid it.

  5. avatar former water walker says:

    Yeah thank you GSL…what brave azzholes you are ILL state bulls. Got that gun outa’ the hands of an octogenarian😏No crime committed just scum acting all macho…

  6. avatar Mark N. says:

    Since the other case (People v. Brown) as to the constitutionality of the FOID Act was headed to the Illinois Supreme Court, why this case, and why now?

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Broader basis. This is about an expired FOID card resulting in confiscation.

      1. avatar Dozer says:

        Maybe because the Brown case is headed up by a lawyer that can’t argue his way out of a wet paper bag.

        Take a listen and see if you would let this guy represent you for a parking ticket:

        http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/ds.18-2686.18-2686_04_04_2019.mp3

        1. avatar Duty to Complain says:

          @Dozer:
          That lawyer *wins* 2A cases all the time.
          He wins. He really does. Where did you hear that there is some issue?

  7. avatar Iillinois_Minion says:

    This case is one of a few reasons I joined GSL. If the NRA-IL can bankroll this into success, I just might give them (NRA-IL) some more money once again.

  8. avatar 2a suxs sucks says:

    Go get them John

  9. avatar Jedi Wombat says:

    So, the guy who went and shot up his place of employment, who should have never had an FOID in the first place skates for several years and until he went on his rampage ISP didn’t do squat, an elderly ex-Marine doesn’t renew and they clean out his safe shortly thereafter? F the ISP and every politician in shitcago. Frigging jokes.

  10. avatar sound awake says:

    the day illinois requires women to pass an extended background check and provide a photo and pay a fee before being granted government permission to kill their unborn children is the day i will support the foid card in illinois
    that is to say:
    NEVER

  11. avatar Darkman says:

    Nothing more than the leadership trying to change the narrative. They know their shits in the quik and the membership is not pleased with whats going on inside the organization. So now they’re hoping for anything to calm the natives so to speak. We must continue to hold their feet to the fire and demand institutional as well as leadership change.

  12. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    These are the same morons who tell you that voter IDs are impeding people’s rights.

  13. avatar Made in America says:

    Cripes. Just like a bunch of babies.
    Lesson learned. Don’t lose the card. Bet’cha you don’t lose your driver’s license.
    Doesn’t anyone use a CALENDAR????? Blame everyone else but yourself.
    Geeeeeezzzzzz!!!!!!!! Get with it people.

    1. avatar Shallnot BeInfringed says:

      That’s not the point at all, troll… You can’t possibly be so willfully ignorant as to ignore all the clear contradictions and unfairness in the ways this FOID process is being misused and abused.

      As stated above by Jedi Wombat (who phrases it more concisely than I would), “So, the guy who went and shot up his place of employment, who should have never had an FOID in the first place skates for several years and until he went on his rampage ISP didn’t do squat, an elderly ex-Marine doesn’t renew and they clean out his safe shortly thereafter?” How can you fail to see the basic unfairness of these two disparate examples?

      Bunch of babies, huh? I doubt that you even understand what unconstitutional means…

  14. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    Funny: You can’t use your FOID card as and ID in a school. ( I knew that) I gave the school cop my card when I dropped off a forgotten lunch bag. He said he needed my driver’s license. I told him any criminal can have a driver’s license. I passed a background to get THIS card. He said the school admin told him what to do.
    I like to think I may have changed someone’s mind.

  15. avatar GP100 says:

    Illinois Carry and the ISRA cut NRA out of the Brown case, NRA was chomping at the bit to be involved and bring their resources to bear. They are screwing up the Brown case, this was covered on a post at Guns Save Life a while back.

    Thank God we have another case and will have the support of the NRA.

    1. avatar Duty to Complain says:

      Raoul v Brown is a criminal defense case, it’s not a lawsuit.

      Ms Brown is a defendant in a criminal case.
      It’s my understanding that SHE chooses her lawyer and no one else.

      Is there some issue here?

  16. avatar Domestic Hearse says:

    “The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today announced its support…”

    Gee, thanks. We get more “support” and “agreement” and other such platitudes from the NRA.

    What does this mean? Are they showing up in Springfield with their lawyers? Boots on the ground? Are they supporting the ISRA with funding to hire more pro-2A attorneys to fight the fight?

    Or is this just the NRA trying to appear necessary and relevant, while doing nothing but writing press releases?

    Please, somebody tell me cuz I’d really like to know.

  17. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

    Where was the NRA when Illinois passed the FOID in the first place?

    Now they’re piggybacking on someone else’s suit and hogging credit where they deserve none.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email