Illinois remains the only state in the country without a concealed carry law — that is until July 9 when either Gov. Quinn’s amended version of the legislation will be approved or it will fall entirely into the hands of the 7th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court. 

Considering the partisanship among Springfield lawmakers, it’s no surprise that this is the case. Even less surprising, Gov. Quinn, a strong gun control advocate, used his amendatory veto power to impose major restrictions on the original concealed carry bill. If Quinn’s changes are not approved nor overridden, the originally passed bipartisan bill will be risked, and concealed carry will be legalized by the 7th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court and left with vague provisions and loose restrictions.

Last week, Quinn amended what he called a flawed bill, sending it back to lawmakers to take further action. Among the changes, a one-gun limit would be established on the amount of firearms an individual can carry, guns would be banned completely from alcohol-serving businesses and communities would be able to set their own rules regarding assault-style weapons.

Gun rights advocates say an appeals court can lift the ban, applying a general concealed carry law, possibly carrying more ramifications than either the original or amended version of the bill.

For Quinn to push for major changes after both houses agreed to this compromise is risking what lawmakers — both Democratic and Republican — have worked toward for more than six months. Expecting them to endorse Quinn’s changes in the eleventh hour reflects a lack of understanding of the partisanship that can exist in Illinois.

Last December, the 7th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court declared that Illinois violated the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment by not having a law regarding concealed carry, putting lawmakers on the clock. Fast forward to late May when lawmakers in the Senate approved the compromise, just as they were about to recess for summer.

In the House, the bill was approved in by a 102-13-1 vote in late February; in the Senate, the bill was approved 45-12-1 near the end of the session. Both voting totals reflect well over a three-fifths majority, so what’s stopping lawmakers from overriding Quinn’s veto?

The veto was pure politics. The only thing it will accomplish is further delaying the inevitability of concealed carry in Illinois. Quinn is hoping his gamble will pay off, that enough senators and representatives will stand on his side in the coming days. With the safety of Illinoisans in mind, Quinn’s changes appear normal. Alcohol and guns shouldn’t mix, and carrying two guns isn’t always necessary.

But to Springfield, the veto is inconsequential: There are really only two options left. What matters now is the degree to which the original bill and the decision the Circuit Court of Appeals makes differ from one another. Maybe Quinn will realize the true ramifications of his actions once the deadline is passed without a solution in place.

Just this time, don’t expect the court to give Illinois another month-long extension to get its act together and avoid further embarrassment.