As a newspaper reporter, I can appreciate the need for a hard deadline to spur action.

Though I can hear my editor laughing as I type those words, I have always found it to be largely true that most people do things at the very last minute, whether they be taxpayers filing their annual returns with Uncle Sam on or around April 15, lawmakers passing the state’s budget on the final day of legislative session, or shoppers out on Christmas Eve.

It appears we could be seeing another instance of this with the state’s assault weapons ban.

The law took immediate effect upon receiving Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s signature in January, but Illinois residents who possessed any of the banned weapons prior to the law were grandfathered in. They are required to file an endorsement affidavit for each weapon with the Illinois State Police by Jan. 1.

The penalty for those in possession of an assault weapon without an endorsement affidavit after that date is a misdemeanor for a first offense and a felony on subsequent charges.

According to data from ISP, 6,141 people have disclosed owning 12,086 firearms, 6,254 accessories and 117 cartridges of ammunition covered under the ban since the portal opened Oct. 1.

For context, there are more than 2.4 million people who carry Firearm Owners Identification cards in the state. Not every gun owner in the state owns a banned weapon, but it’s surely higher than the .25% of registered gun owners who have registered so far.

So unless there are a flood of registrations in the final two and a half weeks of the year, there will likely be significant noncompliance. Several prominent Republican elected officials have said as much, including 2022 gubernatorial nominee Darren Bailey. The vast majority of the state’s elected sheriffs have said they believe the law is unconstitutional and have vowed not to enforce it.

But still, Gov. J.B. Pritzker, asked by reporters in Chicago on Tuesday, said he was satisfied with the implementation of the law so far.

“The idea here is to make sure that people are registering their assault weapons — and they are,” Pritzker said. “Thousands and thousands of people have registered their assault weapons. We can expect that to continue… I think it’s true for all of us that when we’re faced with a deadline, you start to work more significantly toward the end of that deadline than you do at the beginning of it.”

But seconds later, the governor also acknowledged reality: Though in effect, final judgement on the ban has not yet been rendered.

“In this circumstance, I also know that this thing is working its way through the courts and likely will end up at the Supreme Court,” Pritzker said. “So we’ll have to wait for the final decision there. But I do believe that this law will go into effect on Jan. 1 and that it will save lives across the state.”

Here’s what’s known with just weeks before the new year begins:

• A federal judge in East St. Louis on Tuesday said he was not likely to issue a temporary injunction delaying the Jan. 1 registration deadline.
• State Rep. Dan Caulkins, R-Decatur, has filed a separate request for an injunction to the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the registration requirement from taking effect. Caulkins was the lead plaintiff in the state challenge to the ban, which was upheld by the Illinois Supreme Court in August. He has since filed a cert petition with the nation’s high court seeking a review of the state court’s decision, alleging the plaintiffs were denied their due process right to a fair hearing due to the participation of two justices with perceived conflicts. The high court will decide whether or not to take the case in January. Cert petitions are rarely granted. And an injunction here is also likely a long shot.
• The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, a bipartisan, bicameral state legislative committee that reviews administrative rules imposed by state agencies, declined on Tuesday to permanently codify emergency rules put in place by ISP for the endorsement affidavit process. They will consider them again at their meeting next month. Until then, the temporary rules remain in place.
• In November, a federal appeals court in Chicago upheld the state’s ban, though kept the door open for plaintiffs to appeal, which would likely bring it before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Clearly, there are a lot of balls in the air with the future of the state’s ban. But it remains in effect barring a last-minute intervention from the courts. 

It appears anti-abortion advocates are a judge’s signature away from a rare victory in the most friendly state for abortion rights in the Midwest.

Attorney General Kwame Raoul has agreed to permanently halt enforcement of a law signed earlier this year that was aimed at preventing anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers from engaging in deceptive practices.

In August, a federal judge had placed a preliminary injunction halting enforcement, calling it “both stupid and very likely unconstitutional.” That order likely becomes permanent now.

State Rep. Bill Hauter, R-Morton, whose wife operates a crisis pregnancy center, said Raoul “should be ashamed for introducing garbage legislation that wasted everyone’s time and taxpayers’ money for a virtue signaling exercise.”

“It’s obvious to me that pro-abortion advocates support one choice — abortion,” Hauter said. “By pushing this pathetic legislation, the far-left has shown they will do anything to shut down real choice and push their radical agenda.”

In the past five years or so, Illinois has enacted among the most liberal reproductive health laws in the country, including removing "trigger law" language that could have made the procedure illegal once Roe v. Wade was overturned, enshrining the procedure as a “fundamental” right and repealing the state’s parental notification law.

But this one apparently went too far as it butted up against fundamental First Amendment questions. And Raoul saw the writing on the wall.

Even if it’s not the intention, it’s not uncommon for states with one-party rule to end up in situations where laws test the bounds of constitutionality. The lack of a strong legislative opposition means that the balance, if anywhere, often comes through the courts.

Illinois is still a beacon for abortion rights. But that only goes so far.

U.S. Rep. Mike Bost, R-Murphysboro, had the support of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., before he was ousted from his position. In case there was any doubt, new Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., this week confirmed his support for the five-time incumbent over primary challenger Darren Bailey.

Johnson’s support for Bost is basically a formality. Except under very rare circumstances, party leaders almost always support their incumbent members for reelection. The real question is how much money the National Republican Congressional Committee — the campaign arm Johnson now controls, will devote to helping Bost fend off Bailey in the deeply conservative Southern Illinois district.

Last weekend, Bailey was endorsed by Rep. Mary Miller, R-Hindsboro, and seemingly by controversial Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who orchestrated McCarthy’s removal from the speakership.