CHICAGO POLICY

ILLINOIS’ NEW ASSAULT WEAPON BAN

by ANUSHA MEHTA STAFF WRITER

Anewly passed Illinois law bans the purchase of most semi-automatic weapons and large-capacity magazines. Current semiautomatic weapons owners will be required to register with the Illinois State Police by January 1, 2024 and its usage is restricted to private property or approved sites, such as shooting ranges. Despite recent controversy over the term “assault weapons,” this bill has been colloquially nicknamed an “assault weapons ban” by both proponents and opponents. For clarity, assault weapons generally refer to automatic or semi-automatic weapons capable of accepting detachable magazines, a pistol grip, and occasionally other features. Some gun rights organizations find the term to be misleading, as “assault weapons” are often referred to as military-style, despite having high civilian usage. The issue of safety has been a crucial aspect of debates centering this bill. Opinions differ on how to address violent crime in Chicago, with some advocating for increased policing efforts, while others call for redirecting resources to address underlying causes. Many Hyde Park residents expressed safety concerns for the area: Anna York, 76, a Hyde Park resident since 1982, stated, “It’s a wonderful place to live, but there are these really serious issues that are here with us.” Jackie Jackson, the owner of Kilwins Hyde Park,

HB 4408: INSURING A SECOND CHANCE

by ALEJANDRO SANDOVAL STAFF WRITER

Avictory in the name of harm-reduction nears for Illinois with the passing and signing of HB 4408. This is a deceptively small, and potentially life-saving amendment to the Illinois insurance code.

HB 4408 amends Illinois statute on coverage and copayments. Illinois statute previously ensured that individual and group policies, including federal healthcare, which cover prescription drugs also cover at least one type of opioid antagonist in full and effective form. Included in this coverage are refills for said opioid antagonists. HB 4408 now amends the protection of policyholders, ensuring that by January 1st, 2024, no providers can impose copayments on coverage of naloxone hydrochloride. This protection is key, as naloxone hydrochloride is the most popularly used and important opioid antagonist, branded as NARCAN.

There are few things in modern medicine that we could call imme- shut down the shop in 2022 after her storefront was damaged by stray bullets. She said that more policing would make her feel safer. Steven Lucy, the owner of Open Produce, asserts that increased policing to an already heavily patrolled neighborhood won’t change the violent crime rate, and alternative solutions should be explored.

Additionally, many Hyde Park residents also believe that removing semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines from violent crimes will reduce the risk of a lethal shooting. UChicago Crime Lab director Kim Smith says that considering ¾ of shootings begin with an altercation involving a gun, removing widespread availability of high-capacity magazines could make these shootings less likely to result in

CONTINUED ON PAGE 38 diate “miracle cures.” NARCAN is arguably one of them. It effectively reverses the occurrence of an opioid overdose, through the quick, safe, and easy administering of a concentrated nasal spray – which is not harmful, even if administered to non-overdosing patients. NARCAN is currently mostly available to the general public in most areas of the United States through prescription, pharmacy order, and municipal or state programs. However, to the dismay of harm-reduction advocates, it is not offered over-the-counter. Despite this, HB 4408 greatly increases

CONTINUED ON PAGE 39

. . .death.

Primary advocates for this law include Moms Demand Action and Students Demand Action, part of Everytown for Gun Safety’s grassroots network. They claim that this bill will save lives by keeping guns away from people in crisis and holding illegal gun traffickers accountable. The tragedy of Highland Park, an Illinois mass shooting on July 4 in which 7 were killed and 48 were injured, was referenced several times by activists and lawmakers as the law was passed.

However, there are other Chicago residents that voiced concerns about this ban posing a risk to public safety, particularly in high-crime areas where police are unresponsive. The main opponents of this bill include gun rights groups like the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) and the National Rifle Association of America (NRA). They claim that this bill is an infringement of their 2nd and 14th Amendment rights, specifically preventing their right to self-defense. Gun rights advocates have filed several lawsuits against this ban. In two different lawsuits, both representing over 800 plaintiffs, courts have approved a temporary restraining order on the law. Enforcement of this law is currently blocked for the plaintiffs.

Other gun rights advocates point towards the Supreme Court’s ruling in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, where they struck down a New York law that may affect the Illinois law. The law considered in Bruen was the Sullivan Act, which required that New York residents who want a concealed-carry permit “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.” Gun-control advocates argue that the Bruen ruling applies only to concealed carrying. However, gun-rights advocates cite Justice Thomas’ creation of a new test, which states that gun laws must “The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the na- tion’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” The NRA used this test to claim this new law is illegal, stating that semiautomatic power is a century old.

While gun-control and gunrights advocates argue over the issue, both sides point to legal precedent, statutes, and data as evidence for their case. Gun-control proponents argue that Illinois is the ninth state to enact an assault weapons ban. Other states have also faced lawsuits after implementing similar restrictions. Benjamin v. Bailey, a State Supreme Court lawsuit based on Connecticut’s assault weapons ban, upheld a similar Connecticut law. They cited that the statutory ban on assault weapons does not violate the state constitutional right to bear arms, as the ban continues to permit access to a wide range of weapons.

It remains to be seen whether this law will be upheld or struck down by the courts. The only thing known for certain is that this is a complex, controversial law. The results of this case will set the tone

ARO REVISITED: NEW LOOK, SAME PROBLEMS

by DANIEL KIND STAFF WRITER

Thestale air stinks of mildew, water-stained paint is peeling off the wall, and if it’s not infested with bugs, the furniture is thrashed. City Bureau reported on one woman from Belmont Cragin, known pseudonymously as Sandra, who was 3,000 dollars in debt for this apartment. Eventually evicted, she was forced to live with her sister-in-law; only because her teenage son earning extra income through his work at Domino’s could she afford to live elsewhere. In Chicago, her story is increasingly familiar. A 2022 Harris

Poll revealed that 25% of Chicagoans say their housing situation is unstable, and just months later, a report from UIC told the city that it still needs 119,000 affordable housing units just to meet current needs. So what has the city done? They turned to a decades-old policy and tried to give it new life. The Affordable Requirements Ordinance (ARO) has been around since 2007, and it mandates two options for developers: either make 10% of units in their new developments affordable or pay an “in lieu” fee used to fund other affordable housing programs. Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. affirmed Chicago’s prerogative to use laws like the ARO to create affordable housing, but it has barely put a dent in Chicago’s housing crisis. As South Side Weekly disclosed, the program produced a mere 1.5% of needed units and only $124 million of “in lieu” payments. So, in October 2019, the city formed the Inclusionary Housing Task Force, which recommended amendments and adjustments to the ARO before

CONTINUED ON PAGE 40

HB 4408: INSURING A SECOND CHANCE

. . .the availability of NARCAN, by ensuring that eligible policyholders can access the life-saving drug with no copayment. This lifesaving access to NARCAN is still barred by a considerable cost without coverage –often for those who are most at risk for overdose deaths and exposure to dangerous synthetic opioids. However, HB 4408 does mark progress towards increasing availability, and a better opportunity to stop lethal overdoses.

This step forward is crucial in the context of the modern opioid addiction crisis, sparked by negligent distribution of prescription drugs, and in recent years, the distribution of unregulated synthetic opioids which have further induced fears and overdoses across the U.S. and Cook County. The situation is frankly bleak, and the nationwide carceral and punitive normative policy approach has proven ineffective. Since 2015, opioid overdose death rates have risen at an alarming rate across the U.S. In Cook County, opioid overdose deaths more than doubled in a mere six years: from 647 in 2015, to 1,936 in 2021. Preliminary 2022 data records 1,599 overdose deaths, but the Medical Examiner’s Office’s approximations place the overdose death toll to over 2,000 Cook County residents. The crisis is not limited in demographic either. Within Cook County, White and Hispanic communities suffer similar increasing and alarming rates of overdose deaths, while Black communities suffer both a strongly disproportionate rate and totality of overdose deaths. College students are not insulated from the problem either. Research in the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry has found that undergraduate student nonmedical

CONTINUED use of opiates increased by 343% between 1993 and 2005–a figure which has likely only increased since. Consequently, said usage is linked to increased unintentional overdoses. No community is isolated from the nation-wide tragedy, as overdose deaths continue to skyrocket. Despite the meteoric rise of overdose deaths, harm-reduction policy and initiatives have long been misunderstood, and derided. Opponents of harm-reduction policies and initiatives such as HB 4408 often ridicule harm-reduction initiatives such as needle exchange programs and safe-smoking kits as reinforcing