Federal appeals court upholds Illinois ban on semiautomatic weapons 29%

By Hallie Golden0%

7/10/2026, 12:50:45 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 16% saturation with 89 hits. Analysis detected 922 faulty-reasoning hits from 557 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.1% and a BS Rank of 29% (15,710 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 71.80% of the article peer group.

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences. 
Swipe for next article 
A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld an Illinois ban on semiautomatic weapons, keeping in place a law passed largely in response to a deadly Independence Day parade shooting. 
The ruling by the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturns a lower court decision that found the ban unconstitutional. 
The 2-1 appellate decision found that the Illinois law does not violate the Second Amendment, and its restrictions are “consistent with the principles that underpin our Nation’s tradition of firearm regulation.” 
“Whether to adopt them is thus a decision reposed in our elected representatives, and we reverse,” the appeals court said. 
The majority opinion also pushes back on claims made by the plaintiffs that semiautomatic weapons are not at fault for mass shootings. 
“The undisputed record evidence undercuts that claim, showing that the presence of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines is strongly correlated with the severity of the societal problem,” the opinion states. 
Democratic Gov. 
JB Pritzker said in a post on X that the decision is “a victory in the fight to end gun violence that helps keep our communities safe.” 
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry trade association seeking to stop the ban, said that it is disappointed with the decision and plans to ask the U.S. 
Supreme Court to review the case. 
The gun trade group said it agrees with Chief Judge Michael Brennan’s dissent in which he wrote that the country prohibits governments from banning “firearms commonly owned for self-defense.” 
“Because the people have overwhelmingly chosen the AR-15 rifle and its magazine as their weapon of choice, they are protected by the Second Amendment,” the judge's dissent states. 
The Protect Illinois Communities Act was signed into law in 2023 by Pritzker and bans AR-15 rifles and similar guns, large-capacity magazines and an assortment of attachments. 
It came six months after a 2022 shooting in which a gunman on a rooftop in the Chicago suburb of Highland Park opened fire on a parade, killing seven people and injuring more than three dozen. 
The law prompted immediate pushback from county sheriffs who said they refused to enforce what they considered an unconstitutional law, while gun owners and advocates sued. 
In 2024, a federal judge overturned the ban, leaning on recent U.S. 
Supreme Court rulings that strictly interpret the Second Amendment right to keep and bear firearms. 
The injunction was set to take effect 30 days after the judge's decision. 
But that same day, Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed a notice of appeal, which ultimately led to a stay in the injunction. 
Raoul said Thursday's decision enhances public safety. 
“We have seen the damage that assault weapons and large-capacity magazines can inflict, and these weapons of war have no place in our communities,” he said in a statement. 
Last month, the Supreme Court announced it will consider whether bans on semiautomatic rifles, often called assault weapons, violate the Second Amendment. 
In the fall, the court, which has expanded gun rights, is expected to hear appeals challenging a ban in the Chicago area, which predates the statewide law. 
Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in Please refresh your browser to be logged in 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.4%Hallie Golden: 0.5%The Independent: 3.9%Confirmation Bias8.4%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.4%The Independent: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Hallie Golden: 1.8%The Independent: 3.6%Availability Heuristic6.5%This article: 5.0%Hallie Golden: 0.6%The Independent: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic5.0%This article: 4.8%Hallie Golden: 0.2%The Independent: 0.8%Hindsight Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.2%The Independent: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 7.9%Hallie Golden: 3.0%The Independent: 7.9%Framing Effect7.9%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.7%The Independent: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.6%Hallie Golden: 0.2%The Independent: 0.4%Status Quo Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Hallie Golden: 1.0%The Independent: 2.2%Optimism Bias4.8%This article: 4.8%Hallie Golden: 1.1%The Independent: 1.3%Pessimism Bias4.8%This article: 13.8%Hallie Golden: 4.9%The Independent: 10.4%Negativity Bias13.8%This article: 6.5%Hallie Golden: 0.5%The Independent: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias6.5%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.1%The Independent: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.4%The Independent: 2.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.0%Hallie Golden: 0.6%The Independent: 1.8%Recency Bias11.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.1%The Independent: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 1.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.5%Hallie Golden: 1.5%The Independent: 3.6%Appeal to Authority13.5%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.6%The Independent: 4.0%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.7%The Independent: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 11.3%Hallie Golden: 2.5%The Independent: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion11.3%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.1%The Independent: 1.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 16.0%Hallie Golden: 1.6%The Independent: 3.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)16.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.1%The Independent: 0.9%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.1%The Independent: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.0%Hallie Golden: 0.3%The Independent: 0.1%Composition/Division5.0%This article: 5.0%Hallie Golden: 0.2%The Independent: 1.8%Anecdotal5.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.6%The Independent: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.0%The Independent: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 1.2%The Independent: 2.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 9.9%Hallie Golden: 1.3%The Independent: 2.0%Quote-first Misdirection9.9%This article: 10.4%Hallie Golden: 0.9%The Independent: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice10.4%This article: 3.9%Hallie Golden: 3.4%The Independent: 0.7%Indoctrination3.9%This article: 0.0%Hallie Golden: 0.3%The Independent: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Hallie Golden: 0.2%The Independent: 0.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias4.8%This article: 6.5%Hallie Golden: 4.9%The Independent: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.5%

557 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers31%attributed speech382writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageJB Pritzker • 27 words • 100.0% coverageNational Shooting Sports Foundation • 29 words • 0.0% coverageNational Shooting Sports Foundation • 6 words • 0.0% coverageNational Shooting Sports Foundation • 29 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Brennan • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageKwame Raoul • 7 words • 0.0% coverageKwame Raoul • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Michael Brennan

100%flagged-word coverage
28 attributed words16% of attributed speech87% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Michael Brennan: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-15.2 ptsWriter: 15.2%Michael Brennan: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -9.4 ptsWriter: 9.4%Michael Brennan: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -7.1 ptsWriter: 7.1%Michael Brennan: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-5.8 ptsWriter: 5.8%Michael Brennan: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.