NakPPI Posted February 14, 2012 at 03:55 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 03:55 PM I wonder if the judge in Moore said no so the judge in Shepard can say yes, instant conflict. Would that not go to Illinois Supreme rite away? or am I as stupid at the judicial system as I think I am? Wrong court system. This is federal. So the only place to go is the seventh circuit and then to SCOTUS. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
stm Posted February 14, 2012 at 04:10 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 04:10 PM How long will this motion delay a decision in Shepard v. Madigan? Is the judge in Shepard obliged to follow the precedent set by Moore? If the judge in Shepard issues an injunction, is it only valid in the Southern District of Illinois? Will split decisions hasten a ruling from the 7th Circuit?
Federal Farmer Posted February 14, 2012 at 04:18 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 04:18 PM How long will this motion delay a decision in Shepard v. Madigan? Is the judge in Shepard obliged to follow the precedent set by Moore? If the judge in Shepard issues an injunction, is it only valid in the Southern District of Illinois? Will split decisions hasten a ruling from the 7th Circuit? I think the Moore ruling is non-precedential, though the Shepard judge can utilize it informationally.
NakPPI Posted February 14, 2012 at 04:27 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 04:27 PM How long will this motion delay a decision in Shepard v. Madigan? None. This sort of thing will be entered "off call" I doubt that there will be a hearing unless the judge requests it. Is the judge in Shepard obliged to follow the precedent set by Moore? Nope. The Moore court is on the same level as the Shepard court. If the judge in Shepard issues an injunction, is it only valid in the Southern District of Illinois? Nope. The constitution doesn't just apply based on districts. Also Shepard is not an injunction case. It's a summary judgment case. Will split decisions hasten a ruling from the 7th Circuit? Yup. Remember the whole discussion about legislative vacuums? If we win summary judgment in Shepard we trigger a legislative vacuum. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Hatchet Posted February 14, 2012 at 06:43 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 06:43 PM I wonder if the judge in Moore said no so the judge in Shepard can say yes, instant conflict. Would that not go to Illinois Supreme rite away? or am I as stupid at the judicial system as I think I am? Wrong court system. This is federal. So the only place to go is the seventh circuit and then to SCOTUS. Sent from my SCH-I500 using TapatalkThanks for the clarification... So I am as stupid as I thought. I knew I shouldn't have slept that much in school.
NakPPI Posted February 14, 2012 at 06:58 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 06:58 PM I meant regulatory vaccuum, not legislative vacuum. Oops. Also, winning Shepard would be ripe for more subtle lawyer humor. Moore was dismissed outright for lack of a second amendment claim. A judgment in Shepard would be like saying not only is there a claim, the plaintiff is right! More thumbs for Myerscough's eyes... Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
lockman Posted February 14, 2012 at 07:13 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 07:13 PM I meant regulatory vaccuum, not legislative vacuum. Oops. Also, winning Shepard would be ripe for more subtle lawyer humor. Moore was dismissed outright for lack of a second amendment claim. A judgment in Shepard would be like saying not only is there a claim, the plaintiff is right! More thumbs for Myerscough's eyes... Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk Were can I get a legislative vacuum, they might come in real handy to clean up around Washington, Chicago and Springfield!
snubjob Posted February 14, 2012 at 07:15 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 07:15 PM How long will this motion delay a decision in Shepard v. Madigan? None. This sort of thing will be entered "off call" I doubt that there will be a hearing unless the judge requests it. Is the judge in Shepard obliged to follow the precedent set by Moore? Nope. The Moore court is on the same level as the Shepard court. If the judge in Shepard issues an injunction, is it only valid in the Southern District of Illinois? Nope. The constitution doesn't just apply based on districts. Also Shepard is not an injunction case. It's a summary judgment case. Will split decisions hasten a ruling from the 7th Circuit? Yup. Remember the whole discussion about legislative vacuums? If we win summary judgment in Shepard we trigger a legislative vacuum. Thanks for clearing that up for me also! Was a little confused. Well maybe alot confused! Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Sigma Posted February 14, 2012 at 09:45 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 09:45 PM I dont get why he said the court left the issue not wholly decided. They went to great detail to explain what bear means and added the words such as. Seems like saying it wasnt decided gives the 7th a way to say the same as Meyerscough
NakPPI Posted February 14, 2012 at 09:55 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 09:55 PM I dont get why he said the court left the issue not wholly decided. They went to great detail to explain what bear means and added the words such as. Seems like saying it wasnt decided gives the 7th a way to say the same as Meyerscough Heller specifically left issues undecided for future cases. Gura only wanted a ruling as to guns in the home. This was a tactical legal decision. If they added too many other issues they may have not gotten the same ruling. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
TomKoz Posted February 14, 2012 at 11:26 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 11:26 PM I dont get why he said the court left the issue not wholly decided. They went to great detail to explain what bear means and added the words such as. Seems like saying it wasnt decided gives the 7th a way to say the same as Meyerscough Heller specifically left issues undecided for future cases. Gura only wanted a ruling as to guns in the home. This was a tactical legal decision. If they added too many other issues they may have not gotten the same ruling. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk OR the opportunity for more billable hours???
lockman Posted February 14, 2012 at 11:57 PM Posted February 14, 2012 at 11:57 PM I dont get why he said the court left the issue not wholly decided. They went to great detail to explain what bear means and added the words such as. Seems like saying it wasnt decided gives the 7th a way to say the same as Meyerscough Heller specifically left issues undecided for future cases. Gura only wanted a ruling as to guns in the home. This was a tactical legal decision. If they added too many other issues they may have not gotten the same ruling. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalkthe finding may be narrow but the definitions rendered of "bear" was quite clear, but ignored.
NakPPI Posted February 15, 2012 at 12:05 AM Posted February 15, 2012 at 12:05 AM the finding may be narrow but the definitions rendered of "bear" was quite clear, but ignored. You are referring to dicta. Which is admittedly being ignored. Judge Neville's dissent in Aguilar addresses this issue quite thoroughly. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Tvandermyde Posted February 15, 2012 at 01:27 AM Author Posted February 15, 2012 at 01:27 AM this may delay things about a week for the judge to decide if they are going to address it or not.
dmefford Posted February 15, 2012 at 03:14 AM Posted February 15, 2012 at 03:14 AM OR the opportunity for more billable hours??? Not so on the billable hours... The Supreme Court prefers cases that are very narrowly defined. This case wanted a decision #1 on, "Is the RKBA a fundamental individual right secured by the 2A of the Bill of Rights? And #2., This makes it narrow..., can the firearm be carried in the home ready for defense? That is very narrow. He did not want to ask can it be carried in the back yard? or on the street? or anywhere else. The result: 1. The RKBA is a fundamental individual right2. It can be carried in the home loaded for bad guys. That is the bare essence of the findings... Regards, Drd
Sigma Posted February 24, 2012 at 10:40 PM Posted February 24, 2012 at 10:40 PM The Daily caller talks about this. And gives a nice plug to Illinois carry
Frank Posted February 25, 2012 at 10:54 PM Posted February 25, 2012 at 10:54 PM The Daily caller talks about this. And gives a nice plug to Illinois carryI like Bob Barr. He writes some pretty good stuff. I think he mentions the Moore v. Madigan case, not Shepard v. Madigan. At any rate, it was a good article, and great to see IllinoisCarry mentioned in the press again! Thanks for sharing this article with us! -- Frank
abolt243 Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:26 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:26 PM Yeah, I know. You saw this jump to the top and you were hoping for a decision. Well, that ain't it. But, there has been much consternation over the fact that Judge Meyerscough dismissed Moore and the fact that she was an Obama appointee, that I got to wondering about Judge Stiehl, the presiding judge in Shepard. This has probably been covered someplace already and if it has, I'll remove this post. But, I found out that Judge Stiehl was born in 1925, (so he's 87) in Belleville. He served in the Navy during WW II and the Korean conflict. He was in private practice from 1952 to 1986. He served as Asst. States' Attorney at Belleville and Asst. Attorney General of Illinois. He was nominated by Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1986 and confirmed by the Senate within a month. He served as Chief Judge from 1992 - 1993. So, he's a Reagan appointee and has military background. Don't know if that makes him more or less sympathetic to our cause, but it's certainly different than the background of Judge Meyerscough. Just thought I'd pass that along. Tim
TomKoz Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:49 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:49 PM Yeah, I know. You saw this jump to the top and you were hoping for a decision. Well, that ain't it. But, there has been much consternation over the fact that Judge Meyerscough dismissed Moore and the fact that she was an Obama appointee, that I got to wondering about Judge Stiehl, the presiding judge in Shepard. This has probably been covered someplace already and if it has, I'll remove this post. But, I found out that Judge Stiehl was born in 1925, (so he's 87) in Belleville. He served in the Navy during WW II and the Korean conflict. He was in private practice from 1952 to 1986. He served as Asst. States' Attorney at Belleville and Asst. Attorney General of Illinois. He was nominated by Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1986 and confirmed by the Senate within a month. He served as Chief Judge from 1992 - 1993. So, he's a Reagan appointee and has military background. Don't know if that makes him more or less sympathetic to our cause, but it's certainly different than the background of Judge Meyerscough. Just thought I'd pass that along. Tim 87 years old !!!!! Wonder if it's taking so long because the ruling is being written between naps! ;~)
abolt243 Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:52 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:52 PM Yeah, I know. You saw this jump to the top and you were hoping for a decision. Well, that ain't it. But, there has been much consternation over the fact that Judge Meyerscough dismissed Moore and the fact that she was an Obama appointee, that I got to wondering about Judge Stiehl, the presiding judge in Shepard. This has probably been covered someplace already and if it has, I'll remove this post. But, I found out that Judge Stiehl was born in 1925, (so he's 87) in Belleville. He served in the Navy during WW II and the Korean conflict. He was in private practice from 1952 to 1986. He served as Asst. States' Attorney at Belleville and Asst. Attorney General of Illinois. He was nominated by Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1986 and confirmed by the Senate within a month. He served as Chief Judge from 1992 - 1993. So, he's a Reagan appointee and has military background. Don't know if that makes him more or less sympathetic to our cause, but it's certainly different than the background of Judge Meyerscough. Just thought I'd pass that along. Tim 87 years old !!!!! Wonder if it's taking so long because the ruling is being written between naps! ;~) Now, be nice. For all we know, he's a 87 year young techie that's reading your comments on his iPad while dictating his decisions to a voice recognition laptop!! Quite frankly, I hope that I am still around to take naps at 87. I can't imagine still subjecting myself to the stress of being on the bench!! Tim
NakPPI Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:57 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:57 PM You guys are funny. Their law clerks write this stuff and then they edit it. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Drylok Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:58 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 10:58 PM I hope the Paulbots read this and take it under great consideration when they close the curtain in November
abolt243 Posted March 9, 2012 at 11:21 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 11:21 PM You guys are funny. Their law clerks write this stuff and then they edit it. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk Then the clerks very well may be reading our comments on their iPads!! T
abolt243 Posted March 9, 2012 at 11:21 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 11:21 PM I hope the Paulbots read this and take it under great consideration when they close the curtain in November Yep, this might be another spot that needs to be filled sometime in the next 4 years. UT
TomKoz Posted March 9, 2012 at 11:31 PM Posted March 9, 2012 at 11:31 PM Come on guys/gals, judges and clerks have a sense of humor to!
Sigma Posted March 10, 2012 at 12:43 AM Posted March 10, 2012 at 12:43 AM Yeah, I know. You saw this jump to the top and you were hoping for a decision. Well, that ain't it. But, there has been much consternation over the fact that Judge Meyerscough dismissed Moore and the fact that she was an Obama appointee, that I got to wondering about Judge Stiehl, the presiding judge in Shepard. This has probably been covered someplace already and if it has, I'll remove this post. But, I found out that Judge Stiehl was born in 1925, (so he's 87) in Belleville. He served in the Navy during WW II and the Korean conflict. He was in private practice from 1952 to 1986. He served as Asst. States' Attorney at Belleville and Asst. Attorney General of Illinois. He was nominated by Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1986 and confirmed by the Senate within a month. He served as Chief Judge from 1992 - 1993. So, he's a Reagan appointee and has military background. Don't know if that makes him more or less sympathetic to our cause, but it's certainly different than the background of Judge Meyerscough. Just thought I'd pass that along. Timi feel a lot better about this now
C0untZer0 Posted March 12, 2012 at 12:34 AM Posted March 12, 2012 at 12:34 AM I take naps. I'd take a nap every day if I could. On Sundays I take 2 naps !
rskeeters Posted July 7, 2012 at 12:48 PM Posted July 7, 2012 at 12:48 PM [Were can I get a legislative vacuum, they might come in real handy to clean up around Washington, Chicago and Springfield!] +1
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.