From Naperville’s Doorstep to the Steps of the Supreme Court

Dear Fellow Second Amendment Supporters and Gun Owners,

My name is Robert Bevis, a Miami native born into the world of firearms when my dad opened his gun shop back in the day. At just 11 years old, I’d sweep the floors, staple targets, and clean guns – my reward? Blasting 200 rounds through any firearm on the rack. That grit turned me into a gunsmith, competition shooter, and certified firearms instructor, all fueled by a deep-rooted passion for the Second Amendment and the unshakeable belief that law-abiding Americans have every right to bear arms for protection, provision, and peace of mind. In 2005, that fire led my family – my incredible wife Eleana, our daughter Josalyn, son Chris, and the whole Bevis clan – to plant roots in Naperville, Illinois, opening Law Weapons & Supply. What started as a humble store has grown into a community cornerstone, where we don’t just sell or repair firearms; we educate on safety, offer hands-on training, and champion responsible ownership. It’s more than a business – it’s our family’s vow to uphold constitutional freedoms, one customer at a time.

But in the summer of 2022, when the City of Naperville rammed through a tyrannical “assault weapons” ban in the shadow of the Highland Park tragedy, we couldn’t stand by. That ban wasn’t about safety – it was about control, stripping away the tools everyday Americans use for self-defense, hunting, and sport. So, on September 7, 2022, Law Weapons, alongside the National Association for Gun Rights, filed the very first lawsuit challenging it: Bevis v. City of Naperville, Illinois (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Case No. 1:22-cv-04775). We’re suing the City, its Police Chief Jason Arres, and now the State of Illinois too, over the “Protect Illinois Communities Act” (PICA, HB 5471) – a sweeping ban on certain semi-automatic firearms and large-capacity magazines that law-abiding citizens like you and me rely on daily. Little did we know, this humble filing from a family-owned store would spark a nationwide reckoning for our Second Amendment freedoms – and today, on November 16, 2025, Bevis remains the lead case, anchoring every challenge in the Seventh Circuit and beyond, raising core questions straight from the Founders’ playbook: Is Illinois’ ban constitutional? Does it flout the “in common use” test from D.C. v. Heller (554 U.S. 570, 2008)? And can the government outlaw widely owned semi-autos and magazines without a shred of historical precedent?

Let me walk you through our story – not as some grand legal epic, but as the gritty, human journey it’s been for the Bevis family and Law Weapons. It’s a tale of ordinary people – a dad teaching his kids to shoot straight, a husband and wife juggling shop ledgers with court filings – staring down government overreach, backed by the unyielding spirit of the Founding Fathers, and now, incredibly, the full weight of the U.S. Department of Justice – a partnership we at Law Weapons helped ignite through sheer persistence. We’ve faced setbacks that kept us up at night, victories that brought tears of relief, and a road ahead that could redefine liberty for generations. Here’s how it unfolded, step by step, from that fateful filing to where we stand today.

The Beginning: Standing Up in Naperville

It started in the quiet urgency of our Naperville shop. On September 7, 2022, we sued the City of Naperville, arguing their ordinance banning “assault weapons” like the AR-15 and large-capacity magazines violated the Second Amendment’s core promise. Judge Virginia M. Kendall took the case, and by November 18, 2022, we’d filed for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt enforcement. Hearings flew by – November 21 for the TRO, December 9 for a stay – but on February 17, 2023, the district court denied our injunction, claiming the ban fit some twisted “historical tradition” under the Supreme Court’s fresh N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (142 S. Ct. 2111, 2022) ruling. It stung – me, a dad who’s taught my kids to shoot safely and responsibly – to hear our rifles called “dangerous and unusual,” a misinterpretation of Heller‘s “common use” test that we’ve fought tooth and nail to correct. But we appealed to the Seventh Circuit on February 21, 2023 (Case No. 23-1353), refusing to let tyrants rewrite the Constitution.

The Fight Goes Statewide

Meanwhile, Illinois didn’t stop at Naperville. On January 10, 2023, they passed PICA statewide, mirroring the local bans and banning specific handguns, semi-autos, and magazines with no historical backing – a direct clash with Heller‘s holding that such outright prohibitions are unconstitutional. We amended our Bevis complaint on January 24, 2023, folding in the state law and adding DuPage County Sheriff Jason Arres as a defendant. This made Bevis the lead case, the North Star guiding a constellation of challenges across Illinois, balancing public safety claims against our sacred individual rights. By November 2023, the Seventh Circuit consolidated Bevis with parallel suits like Credit River Township v. Raoul and Harrel v. Raoul, hearing oral arguments on June 29, 2023, before Judges Easterbrook, Wood, and Brennan. Then came the gut punch: On November 3, 2023, in a 2-1 ruling (Bevis v. City of Naperville, 85 F.4th 1175), Judges Easterbrook and Wood upheld the bans, twisting Bruen to bless restrictions on “dangerous and unusual” weapons – a decision that still burns as the “bad call” from Easterbrook’s pen, ignoring the Amendment’s plain text and the flawed application of the common use test. But hope flickered: Judge Michael B. Brennan dissented fiercely, fighting tooth and nail for us, declaring the Second Amendment “not a second-class right” and AR-15s as “arms in common use” that no historical tradition could justify banning. We sought rehearing en banc on December 11, 2023 – denied – then petitioned the Supreme Court on February 12, 2024 (No. 23-880). On July 2, 2024, cert was denied (144 S. Ct. 2491), with Justice Alito signaling he’d grant it. The bans stood, but Bevis lived on as the lead precedent-setter, its national significance rippling far beyond Naperville – a battleground for 21st-century Second Amendment interpretation.

Barnett Joins the Battle

Enter Barnett v. Raoul (S.D. Ill., Case No. 3:23-cv-00209), filed January 24, 2023, by brave plaintiffs like Caleb Barnett, Brian Norman, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation – cases that intertwined with ours like threads in a single rope, all orbiting Bevis in the Seventh Circuit. Assigned to the indomitable Judge Stephen McGlynn in the Southern District, Barnett hit the gas: A preliminary injunction came on May 11, 2023, shielding plaintiffs from PICA’s clutches. The state appealed, but after a grueling bench trial wrapping in September 2024, Judge McGlynn dropped a bombshell on December 9, 2024: a permanent statewide injunction against PICA’s assault weapons bans (§ 5/24-1.9), magazine limits (§ 5/24-1.10), and registration schemes. He ruled them flat-out unconstitutional under Bruen – no historical analogue for banning arms in common use. The state got 30 days to appeal, and on December 5, 2024, the Seventh Circuit stayed the injunction (Case No. 24-3060), keeping the bans enforced. But Bevis, as the lead, pulled these threads together; our consolidated appeals referenced Barnett, and vice versa, building a unified front across the circuit. Naperville’s mixed community – most rallying behind us at Law Weapons, others pushing for control – mirrors the nation’s divide, but we’ve stood firm as educators and leaders, turning our store into a symbol of the fight.

A Turning Point: The DOJ Steps In

Fast-forward to early 2025, and the tide turned because of you – and folks like us at Law Weapons who wouldn’t quit writing, calling, and pleading for justice. After four heartfelt letters from Law Weapons directly to Attorney General Pam Bondi – pouring out the Bevis family’s story, the empty shelves at our shop, and the raw fear of a disarmed future for our kids – we sparked something miraculous. Those letters, penned from our kitchen table in Naperville, caught fire in the Trump administration. They moved the U.S. Department of Justice to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Law Weapons and the Bevis plaintiffs, filing a game-changing amicus brief on June 13, 2025, in Barnett – and ultimately bringing Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon to orally argue our side. It was our small voice that helped summon the federal cavalry, proving that persistence from everyday warriors like the Bevis family can shake Washington.

What the DOJ Said: Powerful Support for Gun Rights

This DOJ brief wasn’t just support; it was a thunderclap for gun rights, affirming why these bans must fall. Here are some of its powerhouse positives, straight from the government, echoing the fight we’ve led since day one at Law Weapons:

• AR-15s are protected “Arms”: “AR-15s qualify as ‘Arms’ under the Second Amendment because they are ‘weapon[s] that an individual carries for the purpose of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action…'” – echoing District of Columbia v. Heller‘s broad shield for bearable weapons.
• In common use for lawful purposes: AR-15s are “the most popular rifle in the country” and “widely legal and bought by many ordinary consumers,” used for self-defense and sport; mass shootings are “outliers,” not justification for disarmament.
• Direct Bruen violation: The ban “prohibits firearms in common use,” flouting Heller‘s rule against restricting weapons “not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”
• No “militaristic” carve-out: The Second Amendment’s militia clause doesn’t limit the right; history shows “possessing certain ‘militaristic’ weapons was core to the right,” with early Americans required to own military-useful arms.
• Historical mismatch: Under Bruen, Illinois’ “analogues” fail – no Founding-era tradition banned common rifles; 19th-century courts protected “arms useful for militia service.”
• Precedent slams the door: Citing cases like Hanson v. District of Columbia, the DOJ rejected “militaristic” exclusions as “unmoored from history,” with Supreme Court Justices decrying such limits.
• Magazines and attachments included: Bans on “thirty-round large-capacity magazines” and features like pistol grips violate the right, as they serve “legitimate self-defense purposes” and are necessary components, like ammo itself.

This brief humanized our fight, reminding the court that Law Weapons customers, the Bevis family hunters, and millions like you aren’t criminals; we’re citizens the Founders armed.

Oral Arguments: Harmeet Dhillon Takes the Stand

Then came September 22, 2025, in Chicago’s Seventh Circuit courtroom: oral arguments in Barnett (No. 24-3060), with Bevis‘ lead shadow over every word. The panel grilled the state on their “uphill battle” for history, and in a five-minute slot that felt like destiny – thanks to those Bondi letters paving the way – Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon took the podium for the DOJ. Her words? Pure fire for the Second Amendment. Here’s what she said, verbatim, cutting through the legalese to the heart:

Dhillon didn’t just argue; she eviscerated the state’s fearmongering, standing as a beacon for every gun owner who’s felt the chill of government intrusion – a direct result of Law Weapons’ letters to Bondi. The panel took it under advisement – no ruling yet as of today, November 16, 2025 – but whispers from the bench suggest real momentum. The bans limp on under the stay, but Bevis and Barnett, consolidated in spirit if not docket across the Seventh Circuit, are poised to shatter them.

What’s Next: The Road to the Supreme Court

Looking ahead, timelines are tight but triumphant. A Seventh Circuit decision could drop any day – weeks, maybe months – and if they uphold the bans (God forbid), we’ll petition the Supreme Court by early 2026. We’ll have the DOJ, Solicitor General, Pam Bondi as AG, and Harmeet Dhillon leading the charge – a dream team against tyranny, born from our letters at Law Weapons. With this Court’s current Justices – guardians of originalism like Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch – victory isn’t a hope; it’s a likelihood. Striking down these bans wouldn’t just free Illinois; it’d abolish “assault weapons” restrictions nationwide, a monumental win for Second Amendment supporters everywhere. Imagine: AR-15s back on shelves from sea to shining sea, families like mine teaching safe ownership without fear, and the ghost of every Founder nodding in approval. This isn’t just our story – it’s a testament to the American spirit, where one family’s stand in Naperville could reshape gun rights for all, tipping the scales from overreach to liberty.

We’re in the foxhole with you, fighting not for glory, but for the kids we’ll leave a freer America. Thank you for standing with the Bevis family and Law Weapons. Let’s win this – for the Republic.