A federal judge in southern Illinois on Friday issued an injunction blocking enforcement of the state’s new ban on many higher-powered firearms and large-capacity ammunition magazines, just days after a counterpart in Chicago ruled the opposite way.

The ruling came in a case that consolidated lawsuits brought by a variety of groups, including the Illinois State Rifle Association, against the law passed in the Democratic-controlled General Assembly and signed by Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker in January in response to the deadly mass shooting at last year’s Fourth of July parade in north suburban Highland Park.

Writing that “a constitutional right is at stake,” U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn found that the plaintiffs in the case showed that the law caused an “irreparable harm” by denying them the ability to “purchase their firearm of choice” and “exercise their right to self-defense in the manner they choose.”

McGlynn, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Donald Trump in 2020, also noted that “the Illinois Sheriff’s Association and some Illinois States Attorneys believe (the law) unconstitutional and cannot, in good conscience, enforce the law as written and honor their sworn oath to uphold the Constitution.”

Pritizker’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The ruling comes three days after U.S. District Judge Lindsay Jenkins declined to issue an injunction in a similar case in the Chicago-based Northern District.

In that case, Jenkins, appointed last year by President Joe Biden, found that Chicago emergency room physician Javier Herrera filed to show the law created any harm that would “outweigh the overwhelming interest in public safety” and justify an injunction.

Another federal judge in Chicago made a similar ruling in a previous lawsuit a Naperville gun shop owner brought that changes both a local ban and the state law. The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling, and the gun shop owner intends to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Illinois Supreme Court, meanwhile, is set to hear oral arguments on May 16 in a lawsuit challenging the law at the state level.

In addition to the Illinois State Rifle Association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation also is a plaintiff in the federal case before McGlynn in the Southern District.

The lawsuits lean heavily on the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, in which the Supreme Court found that the “plain text” of the Second Amendment protected the rights of the plaintiffs to carry guns for self-defense. The ruling last year also established a new constitutional standard holding that gun laws today shall be historically consistent with laws on the books in the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was codified.

Aside from Jenkins’s decision earlier this week, another federal judge in Chicago in February upheld the weapons ban when plaintiffs in a separate lawsuit tried to use the Bruen ruling to bolster their case that the state ban and the assault weapons prohibition in Naperville were unconstitutional.

Earlier this week, another federal judge in Chicago upheld a separate legal challenge against the ban. That was was brought forth by a doctor who worked at Mercy Hospital & Medical Center on Chicago’s South Side in 2018 when a gunman fatally shot a doctor, pharmacy technician and a Chicago police officer there.

In McGlynn’s courtroom earlier this month, Erin Murphy, a lawyer for the NSSF, argued the state’s ban on many semi-automatic guns — in which each round requires a trigger pull — is too broad because it prohibits guns that are commonly used by law-abiding citizens. Murphy cited Bruen when arguing “the historical tradition test is what is in common use today.”

Meanwhile, Christopher Wells, a lawyer representing the Illinois attorney general’s office, which is defending the ban, argued before McGlynn that the case law cited by Murphy lawyers for the other plaintiffs did not meet the burden to strike down the weapons ban. Wells sought to compare military-use rifles, like M-16s, with AR-15s, which are subject to Illinois’ gun ban and have been blamed on many mass shootings in the U.S., and argued there isn’t much “functional difference” between the two weapons.