Friedman v. City of Highland Park
Headline: Court refused to hear a challenge to Highland Park’s assault-weapons and large-capacity magazine ban, leaving the local restriction intact and affecting residents who own common semiautomatic rifles.
Holding: The Court declined to review the Seventh Circuit’s decision upholding Highland Park’s ban on many semiautomatic firearms and high-capacity magazines, leaving the lower courts’ rulings in place while a Justice dissented seeking review.
- Leaves Highland Park’s assault-weapon and large-capacity magazine ban in effect.
- Owners must move, disable, or surrender banned items within 60 days or face penalties.
- Denial does not settle national legal questions about the Second Amendment.
Summary
Background
A Highland Park resident who wanted to keep now-prohibited firearms to defend his home and a firearms advocacy organization sued after the City of Highland Park, Illinois, passed an ordinance banning many semiautomatic “assault weapons” and nearly all so-called large-capacity magazines that accept more than ten rounds. The law criminalizes manufacture, sale, possession, and gives owners 60 days to move, disable, or surrender these items, with penalties including up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the Second Amendment protects the right to keep the common semiautomatic rifles and magazines that the city banned. The lower courts upheld the ordinance: the District Court entered summary judgment for the city and a divided Seventh Circuit panel affirmed. The Seventh Circuit applied a test looking to whether weapons were common at the 1791 ratification era or related to militia needs and whether law-abiding citizens still had adequate means of defense. Justice Thomas argued that this test misread Heller and McDonald because those cases protect weapons commonly used for lawful purposes even if they did not exist at the founding; he emphasized that roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles.
Real world impact
Because the Supreme Court declined to review the case, the lower courts’ rulings remain in place and the Highland Park ordinance continues to restrict ownership, sale, and possession within the city. Affected residents who legally own the banned firearms face the ordinance’s compliance options or potential criminal penalties. The denial does not resolve the broader national question about the scope of the Second Amendment, so similar challenges may continue in other courts.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia, dissented from the denial and said he would have granted review to correct the Seventh Circuit’s approach and to ensure the Second Amendment is not treated as a second-class right.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?