This seems like a decent interpretation of all of that confusing "mumbo jumbo" about whether or not they they could hear the case. So if the FOID does not apply to the home, how does this person in the case, purchase new ammo, make sure the firearm is working and trains with it (takes it to the range), or purchase a new replacement one for use in the home? They can not do any of those things without a valid FOID, which means the FOID is in the way of "Home use"? Does this also mean that you can not, as an illinois resident go hunting without a FOID? It would mean (at best), the FOID is a purchase/transportation permit. It would mean you could let your FOID expire and possess previously acquired firearms/ammo, you just could not bring them beyond your property line without renewing your FOID. If they strike the legal requirement for mere possession in the home, the ISP will truly have a **** show on their hands. But as soon as you FOID is expired the state police send out to locals to retrieve your firearms and fill out a report till FOID is renewed. I think the IL supreme court just caused more problems for the courts and police than they bargained for.