Importantly, in McDonald v. Chicago, Justice Thomas wrote a brilliant concurring decision for gun rights, *not* arguing the 2nd Amendment, but the “privileges or immunities” clause of the 14th Amendment. And this might really matter.
The 14th Amendment basically permits the federal government to intervene when state abuse the constitutional rights of their citizens.
After the Civil War this was necessary because the southern states wanted to deprive former slaves of their civil rights. However, Thomas’ opinion was that the most essential of these rights is the right to bear arms, thus Chicago could not legally deprive McDonald of his rights.
But this goes further and raises a very, very important question: if a state government oppresses the constitutional rights of its people, can counties of that state sue their state in federal court?
Chicago and Cook County so dominate Illinois, that it can unilaterally force the rest of the state to do its bidding, which it regularly does, even when it is unconstitutional, as with the current gun control regime.
This is so oppressive in so many ways that for some years there have been suggestions to give Cook County political autonomy, a state within a state, so that the rest of the state can have government representation as well.
But if the federal courts accept a county lawsuit against the state of Illinois, on the grounds of the “privileges or immunities” clause of the 14th Amendment, the other counties and their citizens, might finally be once again able to have the full use of the 2nd Amendment.
And these elections, and their non-binding resolutions, might inspire the federal courts to examine the situation.
Not unlike NYC and NYS.
And like New York State, I predict that eventually Illinois will be split into two sections, with CCWs available everywhere except Chicago. And like NYC, Chicago will continue to do everything it can to limit the availability of handguns to its law abiding citizens.