Harrel v. Raoul: FPC and SAF Challenge to PICA

Harrel v. Raoul is a constitutional challenge to the Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA) brought by plaintiffs Dane Harrel and others with the support of the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA). The case applies the Supreme Court's Bruen framework to argue that Illinois's ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines violates the Second Amendment.^[4]

Parties and Legal Strategy

Together, these organizations have advanced arguments that PICA's assault weapons ban and magazine restrictions cannot survive the historical-tradition test required by Bruen.

Key Arguments

The plaintiffs in Harrel argue that the firearms banned under PICA, including AR-15-style semiautomatic rifles, are among the most commonly owned firearms in the United States. Under the Bruen framework, when the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation.^[1]

FPC and SAF have also challenged the magazine capacity limits, arguing that magazines holding more than 10 or 15 rounds come standard with many semiautomatic firearms and that arms in common use for lawful purposes cannot be banned. The Harrel plaintiffs state that many popular handguns are typically sold with magazines holding more than 15 rounds and that AR-15 rifles often come standard with 20- or 30-round magazines.^[2]

Consolidation at the Seventh Circuit

Harrel v. Raoul was consolidated with Barnett v. Raoul, Langley v. Kelly, and the case brought by Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois against Governor Pritzker at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Bevis v. City of Naperville was not part of this merits appeal. The Supreme Court denied review of the preliminary-injunction decision on July 2, 2024. Bevis remained pending in the Northern District of Illinois when the Seventh Circuit decided the merits appeal in July 2026. The merits appeal covered the four consolidated Southern District of Illinois cases. The court considered the Harrel plaintiffs' claims alongside those in Barnett and the other two consolidated cases.^[1]

DOJ Amicus Brief Supporting Plaintiffs

On June 13, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs in the consolidated PICA challenges. The brief argued that PICA violates the Second Amendment by banning AR-15s and other firearms in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful reasons. The DOJ contended that states cannot categorically ban entire classes of arms commonly possessed by law-abiding Americans.

The consolidated appeal was argued before the Seventh Circuit on September 22, 2025.^[3]

Current Status

Oral argument took place on September 22, 2025, as part of the consolidated Seventh Circuit proceeding. On July 9, 2026, the court ruled 2-1 against the plaintiffs, upheld the restrictions as applied to AR-15s and 30-round rifle magazines, and reversed the district court judgments with directions to enter judgment for the defendants. Restrictions the opinion did not address remain open to as-applied challenges. Judge St. Eve wrote the majority opinion, joined by Judge Easterbrook, and Chief Judge Brennan dissented. The injunctions in these consolidated cases have been reversed, and PICA remains enforceable. On September 25, 2026, Justice Barrett extended the deadline to file a petition for Supreme Court review to November 6, 2026, and on October 19, 2026 she extended it again to December 4, 2026.^[1]