On February 22, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion, which refused Illinois' request for a rehearing of Shepard v. Madigan before the entire court. The previous decision in the case, by a three-judge panel of the court, struck down Illinois' complete ban on carrying firearms outside one's home or business for self-defense. Today's decision lets stand the strong interpretation of the Second Amendment offered in Judge Richard Posner's December 11 opinion, and brings Illinois one step closer to the rest of the country in respecting the Right to Carry.
"Today's decision is a major victory for the Second Amendment and all the law-abiding citizens of Illinois who wish both to keep arms, and to bear arms," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "It is now clear that no state can deny law-abiding residents the right to carry a firearm for self-defense outside the home. We have been fighting this case for years and are prepared to keep fighting until the courts fully protect the entire Second Amendment."
Currently, Illinois legislators are working on a concealed carry law in hopes of bringing the state into line with the December ruling, which gave the state 180 days to enact a new law. If the state wants to pursue the matter further in the courts, it would have to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Objecting to the refusal to rehear the case were four judges, led by Judge David F. Hamilton. In an opinion devoted mostly to policy arguments, rather than to legal analysis, Judge Hamilton laments that "In so many public settings, carrying and using firearms present lethal risks to innocent bystanders," a point he tries to illustrate by describing the incident in August 2012 in which two New York City police officers accidentally shot nine passers-by while firing at a murderer near the Empire State Building. No mention is made of the many states that have enacted Right-to-Carry laws with no ill effect. The opinion goes on to urge Illinois to enact the strictest possible law governing who should be allowed to exercise the Right to Carry, restricting the places where people may do so, and suggesting that the state can restrict both the type of firearms that can be carried, and the way in which they can be carried.
This case is just one of many in which NRA-ILA is aggressively pressing courts around the country to recognize and protect the Right to Carry. For more information on our legal activities, please sign up for our online Legal Update newsletter by going to www.nraila.org/legalupdate.
Another Court Victory for the Right to Carry in Illinois
Friday, February 22, 2013
Wednesday, October 14, 2026
FAIRFAX, Va. — Today, the NRA Victory Fund Inc. released a new 30-second ad highlighting Democrat U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico’s longstanding support for banning so-called “assault weapons” and standard-capacity magazines—the firearms and accessories owned by ...
Monday, October 26, 2026
Another election, same former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg working to shape the nation’s gun laws. For years, NRA has exposed Bloomberg’s relentless efforts to export New York style gun restrictions to the rest ...
Tuesday, April 28, 2026
As your NRA-ILA has reported over the last several weeks, the Democrat-controlled Virginia General Assembly and Governor Abigail Spanberger (D) have, between them, approved a sweeping array of radical gun control bills aimed, as NRA’s John Commerford says, ...
Monday, November 2, 2026
A new Essay authored by NRA-ILA Litigation Director Joseph Greenlee and University of Wyoming College of Law Professor George Mocsary has been published in the Yale Law Journal Forum.
Monday, November 2, 2026
“Crime’s way down thanks to Trump — Dems will fight to send it back up,” warns an editorial in the N.Y. Post. “Law-and-order works. Immigration enforcement works. And — like it or not — Trump’s ...
More Like This From Around The NRA

















