Seventh Circuit Upholds PICA in 2-1 Ruling — What Comes Next

On July 9, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld Illinois' Protect Illinois Communities Act — the sweeping ban on semiautomatic rifles, certain shotguns and handguns, and standard-capacity magazines — in a 2–1 decision. The majority opinion was written by Judge Amy St. Eve and joined by Judge Frank Easterbrook. Chief Judge Michael Brennan dissented.

I'm going to be direct with you: this ruling is wrong. And I say that not just as someone who believes in the Constitution, but as the lead plaintiff in Bevis v. City of Naperville — the case that has cost me my Naperville location, years of litigation, and more than I'd care to count. This is as personal as it gets.

What the Seventh Circuit Actually Decided

The three-judge panel reversed U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn's earlier ruling, which struck PICA down after a full trial. Judge McGlynn saw the evidence, heard the arguments, and correctly found that the firearms PICA bans are in common use by law-abiding Americans and therefore protected under the Second Amendment. The Seventh Circuit undid that work.

The majority leaned heavily on mass shooting statistics and what it called consistency with America's "regulatory tradition." That framing is the problem. The Supreme Court's Bruen decision in 2022 was unambiguous: gun laws must be evaluated against the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation — not against modern policy preferences dressed up as legal analysis. If there is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era analogue for banning an entire class of arms in common use, the law fails. Full stop.

Illinois has no such historical tradition. Our history shows regulation of genuinely dangerous and unusual weapons — actual machine guns, cannons — not semiautomatic rifles owned by tens of millions of Americans for self-defense, sport, and hunting. What the Seventh Circuit did was stretch history to fit a preferred outcome. Chief Judge Brennan's dissent recognized this. I'm grateful at least one judge on that panel read Bruen for what it says.

The AR-15 Is Not a Fringe Weapon — And the Court Knows It

The AR-15 is the most popular rifle platform in America. That is not a talking point — it is a market fact. Tens of millions of law-abiding citizens own them. They use them for home defense, competition shooting, and hunting. PICA doesn't just restrict how these rifles are configured. It bans them outright, forces pre-ban owners to register their property with the state, and turns noncompliance into a felony.

A firearm that cannot be owned, possessed, or passed on is not a meaningful right. It is a right in name only.

The majority's reliance on mass shooting statistics to justify the ban isn't constitutional law — it's emotional policymaking with a legal caption at the top. The Second Amendment does not contain an exception for weapons that make legislators uncomfortable. Heller established that arms in common use for lawful purposes are protected. Bruen told courts exactly how to apply that principle. The Seventh Circuit's majority chose a different path.

Where Bevis v. Naperville and the Broader PICA Cases Go From Here

Here is what matters most right now: this is not the end.

The U.S. Supreme Court has already granted certiorari in Viramontes v. Cook County, a related challenge to a similar local assault weapons ban in Illinois. That case is headed to the High Court for full review. With today's Seventh Circuit ruling in hand, the plaintiffs in Bevis v. City of Naperville and the consolidated PICA challenges — including Barnett v. Raoul — are expected to petition the Supreme Court for certiorari as well.

That matters enormously. The Supreme Court now has a direct path to take up the Illinois rifle ban, correct the Seventh Circuit's overreach, and clarify the scope of Second Amendment protection for semiautomatic firearms nationwide. This Court has already demonstrated it is willing to enforce Bruen against lower courts that try to work around it.

You can follow the docket on our case updates page — I'll post developments there as soon as they happen.

What Illinois Gun Owners Should Do Right Now

For the moment, PICA is in effect. That is the legal reality, and I won't pretend otherwise. Here is practical guidance:

• Stay legal and document everything. If you own affected firearms or magazines, keep your records in order. If you registered under PICA's affidavit deadline, that registration is on file. Know what you have and how it is documented.
• Contact your state legislators. Springfield passed this law. Springfield can also amend or repeal it. Make your voice heard.
• Support the legal organizations in this fight. The Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America, and others have been in the trenches on these cases. They need resources to keep going.
• Watch for Supreme Court developments. A cert petition in the PICA cases could come within weeks. If the Court grants review, everything changes. Check our blog for updates the moment news breaks.

I also want to say this plainly: the people fighting hardest against PICA are doing so at real cost. Law Weapons relocated from Naperville to Aurora because of what this law did to this business. I wrote letters to the DOJ and to then-Attorney General Pam Bondi asking them to stand with us. When the DOJ filed an amicus brief on the plaintiffs' side and sent Harmeet Dhillon to argue it at the Seventh Circuit, I understood the weight of what we had built. Today's ruling is a setback — but it is not a surrender.

We have been in federal court for years. We are not stopping now. Stop by the shop in Aurora if you want to talk through any of this in person — the online store is always open as well. But whether you come in or not, know that this case is being fought for every Illinois gun owner who lawfully purchased a rifle and is now being told it might be illegal.

Where Things Stand as of July 9, 2026

The Seventh Circuit has ruled 2–1 to uphold PICA. Judge McGlynn's district court ruling striking down the law has been reversed. The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to rule in favor of the state. PICA remains fully in effect. A cert petition to the U.S. Supreme Court from the Bevis and Barnett plaintiffs is anticipated. Viramontes v. Cook County is already headed to the Supreme Court for full review.

The Seventh Circuit tried to close the door today. The Supreme Court has not yet spoken. That is where our energy goes next.

We took this all the way for a reason. We're not turning back now.

— Robert Bevis, Law Weapons & Supply