By Naomi Johnson, Austin Segal, Maya Simkin, Stephanie Agnew, Kareem Butler, and Briana Payton

Over the last two decades, the policing, prosecution, incarceration, and surveillance of people who carry guns has increased tremendously. This criminalization has majorly impacted Black communities in the state – especially in Chicago and Cook County – without improving safety. In fact, the criminalization of gun possession and the conflation of gun possession and gun use have made communities less safe by entangling more people in the criminal legal system. Time and time again, Black men, teenagers, and children are targeted, arrested, and criminalized for carrying guns that they feel are necessary for their own protection in areas with high rates of gun violence and low clearance rates by police. The purpose of this report is to analyze the policies, processes, and sociocultural realities that have led to the “War on Guns,” which parallels the historic War on Drugs1 and has similarly devastated Black and Brown communities for decades. In this brief report, we use public information to provide a set of facts that explain how the mounting public pressure to stop gun violence has regressively and ineffectively targeted the victims of violence and their neighbors who carry guns for protection. We detail how this approach has contributed to discriminatory policing, confusing laws, harsh sentencing, over-incarceration, and other unnecessary and long-term entanglements with the criminal legal system.   

Chicago: Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts, 2024. 44p.

U.S.Court of Appeals 5th Circuit. No. 23-30033

700 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 2012) (“NRA I”), this court upheld those provisions. But that decision, which was criticized at the time, see National Rifle Ass’n, Inc. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, & Explosives, 714 F.3d 334, 341 (5th Cir. 2013) (“NRA II”) (Jones, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc), preceded two recent clarifying Supreme Court opinions on the methodology by which we construe gun regulations under the Second Amendment. We are now compelled to focus intently on the evidence of firearm access and ownership by eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds near and at the founding, and we conclude that (1) NRA I is incompatible with the Bruen and Rahimi decisions of the Supreme Court, and (2) these provisions are inconsistent with the Second Amendment. Accordingly, we REVERSE the district court’s contrary judgment and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion..

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:20-CV-1438. 29p.