Illinois is one of a handful of states that require a permission slip to simply keep a gun in the home, and though circuit court judges in the state have previously ruled the Firearm Owners ID card requirement unconstitutional, those decisions were tossed out by the Illinois Supreme Court on technical grounds.
Now a lawsuit has been filed in federal court challenging the FOID mandate. Fox News reports that the New Civil Liberties Alliance and three individual plaintiffs are suing to have the law struck down as a violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
Two of the plaintiffs, Christopher Laurent and Kim Dalton, would like to obtain firearms for self-defense but haven’t done so because they “refuse to submit to the state’s unconstitutional procedure, and are unwilling to subject themselves to criminal prosecution by violating the law,” the complaint reads.
The other, Justin Tucker, did obtain a FOID card but doesn’t want to have to continue to renew it or to carry it with him at all times, which state law requires if one wants to retain their right to bear arms in Illinois.
“The police can approach you and demand you ‘show your papers’ to prove you’re allowed to exercise this right, otherwise, you are committing a crime,” NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel Jacob Huebert, the lead attorney on the lawsuit, told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview.
“Some people may have an urgent need to obtain a firearm for self-defense in their home because of a threat they face, yet they absolutely cannot do that. They have to file the application, go through the process, and wait as long as the state wants to take,” Huebert explained.
According to the Illinois State Police, as of January, 2026 it takes 14 days, on average, for the agency to process FOID applications. That means tat applicants can expect to be subject to a two-week waiting period before they can exercise their right to keep a firearm in the home, though some applicants will be waiting even longer.
In its complaint, the NCLA alleges that, “although the FOID Card Act requires the ISP to approve a qualifiedapplicant’s FOID card application within 30 days, the ISP has at times taken much longer to do so—as long as six months or a year.”
Applicants whose applications are not approved or denied within 30 days may seek review by the ISP’s Director, who must “render a decision within 60 business days of receipt of all information supporting the challenge.” The law does not specify what happens if the Director fails to act within 60 days—but it does not result in the applicant receiving a card by default. Thus, state law effectively gives the ISP and its Director at least 90 days to approve or deny a FOID card application.
If an application is denied, there’s supposedly a process for applicants to appeal. But as NCLA notes, those applicants have to use a specific form that’s linked on the ISP website. At least, it’s supposed to be linked. Instead, clicking the link returns a “404 error” message, and it’s unclear whether the document is actually available anywhere else on the ISP website.
NCLA goes on to argue that the FOID mandate turns the Due Process clause of the Constitution on its head.
The FOID Card Act’s absolute prohibition on an individual’s possessionof a firearm before obtaining a FOID card—that is, before submitting to a state administrative process under which state officials decide whether an individual is eligible and will be permitted to exercise that right—deprives individuals of that liberty interest without due process of law.
Instead of starting from the position that we the people have the right to keep and bear arms, Illinois begins with the premise that none of us have the right to possess a firearm. Instead, it’s a privilege doled out by the state to those it deems acceptable.
Of course, the same is true for the right to bear arms, and the Supreme Court blessed “shall issue” permitting systems in Bruen. I suspect that Illinois officials will argue the FOID mandate is nothing more than a “shall issue” permitting scheme that’s constitutional under the Bruen standard, even though that case dealt with the right to carry, not merely to possess a gun in the home.
I’m pleased to see the FOID card requirement challenged in federal court, though I think NCLA has an uphill fight ahead of them. They may get a fair hearing in district court, but the Seventh Circuit hasn’t been particularly supportive of the Second Amendment in recent years. Though the appellate court ruled Illinois’ complete prohibition on bearing arms violated the Constitution, that decision came down more than a decade ago, and since then Seventh Circuit judges have been far more likely to uphold restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms than to strike them down.
Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.
Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
