Illinois Passes Law to Seize Firearms Without Due Process

What are you going to do about it, President Trump?

January 08, 2025 By Darwin Nercesian, News Field Editor

On January 6, gun control advocates from Illinois used a reprehensibly corrupt legislative procedure to pass Karina’s Bill, requiring authorities to seize firearms and ammunition without due process from individuals who are subject to an order of protection. Although the state is embroiled in a litany of Second Amendment lawsuits following its nonadherence to the 2022 United States Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, its lust for tyranny is unphased, as both the substance and the manner of passing this bill should offend even the most novice Constitutionalist.

To truly understand the depths of Democrat legislative depravity, let's first look at the method by which the bill was passed. House Bill 4144 amends the Environmental Protection Act to address water supply disruptions, requiring public water distribution entities to notify affected fire departments and dispatch centers at least 14 days before a disruption event. The Illinois House passed the bill, which then moved to the state Senate. So, what does this have to do with due process or the Second Amendment? Not a damn thing, until…

Just six minutes before the scheduled commencement of the Illinois Executive Committee, the bill was posted, having been stripped completely of its language after the enacting title and replaced with what is called “Karina’s Bill.” The move, executed before the sitting "Lame Duck” session, is called a striking amendment, which differs from a floor amendment proposed in a legislative chamber in that it removes everything after the title and inserts a whole new bill. This was obviously a plan from the beginning, begging Americans to ask why their money is being spent on deceptive games meant to strip them of their own rights.

Moving to the substance of this unconstitutional dumpster fire, Karina's Bill advocates for the use of ex parte hearings to obtain orders of protection, immediately triggering a warrant to confiscate the subject’s firearms and ammunition. Ex parte, a Latin phrase meaning "on one side only" or "by or for one party,” refers to a legal proceeding by which one party communicates directly with a judge without notice to or knowledge of the other party, removing the respondent’s ability to be represented or present their side of a case prior to being stripped of their rights and property.

While ex parte proceedings are undeniably unconstitutional in their very nature, advocates will tell you they are only permitted when a party requires emergency relief, as in cases of domestic violence, child custody, or stalking. However, it has become an exceedingly demostrable fact that these orders have come to be used as a tactical maneuver, especially in family court proceedings, and can cause irreparable harm to those they are levied against unjustly.

Adding insult to Constitutional injury, an individual whose due process, right to bear arms, and property rights are taken from them, obliterating the Second, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments, must later petition law enforcement to regain said rights and property. In the meantime, Karina’s Bill holds agencies completely without liability for damage or destruction to property while it is in their custody.

While Karina’s Bill enjoys the support of Democrats across the state, the “representative” who saw to its passing is Senator Celina Villanueva, standing upon the graves and suffering of victims only to fulfill her party’s lust for disarming law-abiding Americans through the abuse of such laws. Truly, the Founding Fathers understood the mechanisms of tyranny when they wrote the United States Constitution, which subversives like Villanueva regard as historical toilet paper.

“Karina’s Law ensures that firearms are removed from the hands of abusers when survivors need protection the most. This legislation is a life-saving step forward for Illinois families… Karina’s Law closes a dangerous loophole and sends a clear message: Illinois prioritizes the safety and dignity of survivors,” says Villanueva.

I spoke with Richard Pearson, Executive Director of the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), an organization on the front lines of education, training, and promoting firearm safety to law-abiding gun owners across the state. ISRA is also party to legislative efforts and numerous legal challenges defending the Constitutional rights of Illinois citizens who face a daily uphill battle with leftist leaders who have all but destroyed the state’s semblance to anything American.

“We’re opposed to this because it allows for ex parte hearings, and we believe that to be unconstitutional… We have two lobbyists down there all the time, and so, the Illinois State Rifle Association, I’m really proud of us, we’re carrying the load. To give you an idea, to pass this bill, the other side hired thirteen lobbyists,” says Pearson.

Guess who pays those thirteen lobbyists to dismantle your liberty. You do, and that is the tragic reality behind the reason the left always needs just a little more of your hard-earned money. Although ISRA is still discussing what its next move will be, I would bet, based on track record, that we will see a legal challenge to HB 4144 in the future, an unfortunately long and drawn-out process in the judicial system as there is no recourse to be found in such a compromised Illinois legislation.

HB 4144 passed the Senate Monday and is headed back to the House for concurrence. What can/will President Trump do?

With the incoming Trump administration, hopes are high that we will see a resurgence of support for the Second Amendment, but to achieve that, we are going to have to hold the President not only to his word but to his past poor judgment. In his last round, we saw the President surround himself with the likes of anti-Second Amendment Attorney General William Barr, an offense much more difficult to forgive with the selection of Pam Bondi this time out, the former Florida Attorney General and red flag queen of confiscation.

In 2018, President Trump sat next to Dianne Feinstein during a White House round table discussion on gun policy with members of Congress in the wake of the Parkland, FL, school shooting. Then-Congressman Ted Deutch, talked about “limitations on the Second Amendment,” of which there are none in the Constitution, simultaneously urging the President to help ban firearms he considered to be “weapon[s] of war.” “The fact is, a lot is up to the states. And that’s good… You may be different and have a very good thing for your state. I don’t think the states have to be the same.” President Trump responded.

No, Mr. President, it’s not good. You can’t ride the fence when it comes to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. But riding that fence has become a place of solace for the President as a means of seeking approval from both sides rather than standing firm on principle and the foundational values upon which America was built. His position regarding the Second Amendment sounds troublingly similar to that of his position on abortion.

“My view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state… Many states will be different… Many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be. At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people,” said President Trump in a 2024 post on his social media platform, Truth Social.

The two subjects, however, cannot be conflated as the Second Amendment is codified in the Constitution and placed in such a manner that highlights its necessity “to the security of a free State.” And while we are on the subject, let us not forget the shortcomings of our last go around with President Trump, lest they continue to define his true position on subjects of due process and the Second Amendment rather than fade away as the missteps of a politician uneducated on the debate.

“…take the firearms first and then go to court… A lot of times by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court, to get the due process procedures. I like taking the guns early… To go to court would have taken a long time… take the guns first, go through due process second,” Trump told Mike Pence during the 2018 roundtable.

I’m sorry that due process rights are so inconvenient to you, President Trump, but you cannot be for the rule of law while you set aside the supreme law of the land when it suits you or brings you praise by those who generally plot against you. I am elated to see the Biden administration packing their bags and thank God that Kamala isn’t getting an office upgrade, but remember, we have been here before. With the 2025 inauguration around the corner, now is not the time to celebrate great changes to come but to act in a manner that holds feet to the fire of promises that have been made to gain our trust, our loyalty, and our vote.

Darwin Nercesian is a long-time gun rights advocate and shooter of targets far, far away. As a News Field Editor at Firearms News, Darwin writes about the Second Amendment, firearms, and related gear. Follow him on Instagram, X, and YouTube @DTOE_Official.

Trump Choosing Barr for DOJ: No Favor to Gun Owners

Let's Talk About Pam Bondi

Gun Owners' Efforts with Trump Must Not End with White House Win

Does Trump Truly Support the Second Amendment?

2020 is Trump's to Blow with Gun Owners