The Illinois State Police has the power under the Constitution to indefinitely deny a concealed carry license to a man they deemed too dangerous, based on a claim by the Chicago Police Department that he had been a gang member, and a 20-year-old non-violent criminal record, a federal judge has ruled.
On Aug. 28, U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow sided with the Illinois State Police and members of its Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board in tossing a lawsuit brought by plaintiff Michael White and the Illinois State Rifle Association, challenging the ISP’s authority under the U.S. Constitution to deny concealed carry licenses to applicants based on police agencies’ “’reasonable suspicion’ of dangerousness.”
Further, the complaint asserted the ISP and the Illinois state law establishing the criteria for reviewing concealed carry licenses improperly denies them the opportunity to challenge the ISP’s decision, except in court. They said this also violates concealed carry applicants’ constitutional rights.
The case centers on the ISP’s denial of White’s concealed carry license application.
According to court documents, the ISP repeatedly denied White's concealed carry license applications, based on objections from the Chicago Police Department and the Cook County Sheriff’s Office.
According to court documents, the CPD accused White of being a member of the Latin Souls street gang. The police agencies also pointed to White’s criminal history.
According to court documents, White had been convicted in 1998 at the age of 18 for “unlawful use of a firearm,” after police found a loaded handgun in his vehicle. He had also been convicted of possession of marijuana in 1994.
Further, court documents asserted White had been arrested, but not convicted, on charges of battery with a knife and reckless discharge of a firearm, among other charges.
White has consistently disputed his inclusion in CPD’s controversial gang member database, saying he is not and has never been a gang member.
He also asserts he never used nor brandished a knife against anyone, but a pocketknife was found in his possession when he was arrested after a fight “with a man who was harassing his girlfriend.” He said the arresting officers declined “to continue with the charge.”
Regardless, White said the ISP’s decision denying him his concealed carry license, and the state law allowing the ISP to do so, violated his Second Amendment rights and his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Judge Lefkow, however, said the state law and the resulting state concealed carry license application review process are on firm constitutional ground.
“There can be no question that prohibiting truly dangerous people from carrying firearms in public is proper under the Second Amendment,” Lefkow wrote.
And, she said, the state of Illinois is allowed to establish criteria and a review process to weed out who is too dangerous to carry a firearm, and who is not.
“It is true … that ‘dangerousness’ is a broad concept, but granting discretion to licensing authorities to assess dangerousness in individual cases is both necessary and desirable because ‘it is impossible for the legislature to conceive in advance each and every circumstance in which a person could pose an unacceptable danger to the public if entrusted with a firearm,’” Judge Lefkow wrote.
She said no one is entitled to a right to publicly carry a firearm, whether or not they are “dangerous.”
The judge noted courts, including the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, has affirmed that such carry rights may be confined to “law-abiding, responsible citizens.”
In White’s particular case, she said the ISP Concealed Carry Review Board was free, legally, to consider the evidence of his past convictions and past arrests, and alleged gang affiliation, all of which could disqualify him under legal precedents.
The judge conceded White’s conviction was “more than twenty years ago, when he was a young man.”
But, she said, “unauthorized use of a firearm is precisely the type of conduct that raises concerns about a person’s suitability to carry weapons in public.”
“And if a single conviction for a non-violent felony or misdemeanor domestic battery can indefinitely disqualify a person from possessing a gun even in the home, it is not unreasonable to think that a single misdemeanor conviction for unlawful use of a firearm … would indefinitely disqualify a person from carrying a loaded gun in public, where the danger of misuse is greater,” Lefkow wrote.
White has been represented in the case by attorneys with the Law Firm of David G. Sigale P.C., of Wheaton.