Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/06/2017

Home

Zoning Bulletin March 10, 2017 I Volume 11 I Issue 5 The Seventh Circuit has jurisdiction over Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. SEVENTH CIRCUIT (ILLINOIS) (01/18/17)—This case addressed the issue of whether the combined effect of zoning restrictions that limited firearm ranges to a small percentage of a city's total acreage violated the Second Amendment's right to bear arms. The Background/Facts: In 2011, the United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, held that a zoning ordinance enacted by the City of Chicago (the "City"), which banned firearm shooting ranges throughout the city was "incompatible with the Second Amendment." The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution provides: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The City responded to the Seventh Circuit's decision by replacing the shooting range ban with regulations governing shooting ranges. Among those regulations were two zoning restrictions: (1) a zoning restriction al- lowing gun ranges only as special uses in manufacturing districts; and (2) a zoning restriction prohibiting gun ranges within 100 feet of another range or within 500 feet of a residential district, school, place of worship, and multiple other uses. City residents and a builder of firing ranges, as well as several organiza- tions dedicated to the promotion of gun rights, (collectively, the "Op- ponents") brought a legal action against the City, challenging the zoning ordinances as unconstitutional in violation of the Second Amendment. The City defended the zoning restrictions as being necessary to protect public health and safety. Specifically, the City maintained that firing ranges: attract gun thieves; cause airborne lead contamination; and carry a risk of fire. The United States District Court judge found the City's arguments "in- adequate to discharge the City's burden to justify relegating shooting ranges to manufacturing districts." Finding the City "failed to establish a connection between this zoning rule and the public interests it is meant to serve," the judge invalidated the manufacturing -district zoning restriction. The judge, however, upheld the 500-foot distance restriction finding it was "significantly less burdensome" when considered "standing alone." The judge likened the restriction "to a 'law forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings,' " which the United States Supreme Court had upheld as constitutional. (The judge did not specifically address the additional requirement of a 100-foot buffer zone between firing ranges.) Both the City and the Opponents appealed. The City asked the United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, to reinstate the zoning restric- tions limiting firing ranges to manufacturing districts. The Opponents argued that the distance restriction violated the Second Amendment. DECISION: Judgment of United States District Court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. © 2017 Thomson Reuters 3