Jump to content

Ezell v Chicago (Range Ban) Orals held today.


05FLHT

Recommended Posts

As posted by Krucam on MDS - Orals were held today by the 7th.

 

Link to audio - http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?dname=arg (click on today, otherwise look up by case# 10-3525).

 

A very good listen. The court gave Gura a hard time. Chicago got grilled, hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As posted by Krucam on MDS - Orals were held today by the 7th.

 

Link to audio - http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?dname=arg (click on today, otherwise look up by case# 10-3525).

 

A very good listen. The court gave Gura a hard time. Chicago got grilled, hard.

 

It seemed that the Judges see right through Chitcago's arguments. The "nice" sounding judge was on Gura's "same page." I especially liked her interruption when she asked "what do you want your injunction to say?"

 

I am hopefull that there may be a favorable opinion w/o waiting for SCOTUS.

 

:wink: B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WAIT A MINUTE!!! Did you hear what he said at 39:00

He said the city recognizes that they have the right to "keep" and "Bear" Arms

 

We need his idea of what bear means then compare it to Heller.

 

So glad SAF will win this case, and get the injunction. I wonder if this is Daley's best lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if this is Daley's best lawyer.

 

I believe his last name is Feldman and I think he is a professor at Georgetown. He is the hired gun brought in by Chicago.

 

It's hard to do a good job when you aren't left with much to work with. This one looks good. Really good.

 

ETA - James Feldman - Info again courtesy of Krucam on MDS.

 

Released today by Appellees City of Chicago.

 

- They're changing Atty's. Previous one was having a hard time making deadlines...

- They'll file as scheduled their brief tomorrow, 2/18.

- The new Atty representing is a Mr James Feldman (more on this later)

- Mr Feldman teaches at Georgetown, lives in DC. He needs almost the whole month of April off, so don't schedule Oral Arguments (what?) then.

 

Feldman is a heavy weight. I don't know if this indicates concern on the part of Chicago, or a steadfast desire to not lose again...I'm leaning towards the latter. See attached, there's much to read between the lines.

 

Chicago is cracking me up tonight on many levels...

17 - Chicago Atty Shuffle.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WAIT A MINUTE!!! Did you hear what he said at 39:00

He said the city recognizes that they have the right to "keep" and "Bear" Arms

We need his idea of what bear means then compare it to Heller.

 

So glad SAF will win this case, and get the injunction. I wonder if this is Daley's best lawyer.

 

He only said they recognize it. He didn't say the city of Chicago intends to honor it, uphold it, stop violating it, or facilitate it. The only way Chicago will ever honor the rights of their citizens is if they are forced to and that will probably mean dragging them there one law suit at a time...

 

Remember, these are the same arrogant knot-heads who think the rest of the state exists for their benefit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She said she cant believe you would stand here with a straight face...

Wow!

Well this guy is an idiot. He argues that ranges are unsafe because people stand outside and an argument could result in a shoot out?

But then admits he has never been to a range in his life! How can you take a gun range case and never even stop by one to collect evidence for your argument.

 

Thats like him being a criminal defense and never visiting the crime scene or collecting any evidence.

Once again 100% pure emotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was that woman, questioning Feldman?

 

She used a first amendment analogy, supposing that Chicago chose to mandate licensure for journalists, and then banned any training in the city, arguing that one could simply go to Evanston for the training. What did he say in response? ... Something like "that's not a very good analogy, because there would be a constitutionality question on whether Chicago could even mandate licensing of journalists in the first place.

 

Wow. He must have felt pretty stupid after saying that.

 

 

Frankly, I love to see these anti-gun Chicago ******** flustered and on the run. Their arguments, in today's post-Heller and McDonald world, sound increasingly absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no way Chicago is going to appeal their [likely] loss! This is not going to the Supreme Court. It's going to be reversed. I like it, it is full of win. Gura's points about needing gun ranges in crime-ridden neighrboohs, as well as the Chi Gold-Coast was awesome. I listened to all 50+ minutes, it's awesome if you like this sort of thing and you should.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL

 

Thoroughly entertaining...

 

 

ETA:

 

Who was that woman, questioning Feldman?

 

 

I think that was Judge Diane Sykes - Apparently she was once married to Charlie Sykes (Charlie has a conservative radio show on 620 WTMJ that I had enjoyed listening to when I spent more time commuting)

 

I did enjoy listening to her grill Feldman :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WAIT A MINUTE!!! Did you hear what he said at 39:00

He said the city recognizes that they have the right to "keep" and "Bear" Arms

 

We need his idea of what bear means then compare it to Heller.

 

So glad SAF will win this case, and get the injunction. I wonder if this is Daley's best lawyer.

 

He messed up. That Feldman would want a fix-it, do-over. He would say there is no right to bear/carry except in the home, not including the garage or porch (per Chicago decree). He's going to have to switch sides if he wants a good future legal career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

skip gura go straight to 17:00 and listen to the city.

 

this panel is not buying the city's part.

 

to much going through my head on this but I think the city is going to get hammered. I wish they had attacked the CFP range requirement as part of the case and get that suspended as weluit he l.

 

But the city brought in a hired gun who didn't know his a** from applebutter.

 

didn't care for Gura getting the one judge mad, but he recovers.

 

good closing but he misses the point that the judge was leading towards making it cost prohibitive by zoning only for the goldcoast.

 

my fear now is that Posner and Easterbrook will try to screw with a good decision enbanc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

skip gura go straight to 17:00 and listen to the city.

 

this panel is not buying the city's part.

 

to much going through my head on this but I think the city is going to get hammered. I wish they had attacked the CFP range requirement as part of the case and get that suspended as weluit he l.

 

But the city brought in a hired gun who didn't know his a** from applebutter.

 

didn't care for Gura getting the one judge mad, but he recovers.

 

good closing but he misses the point that the judge was leading towards making it cost prohibitive by zoning only for the goldcoast.

 

my fear now is that Posner and Easterbrook will try to screw with a good decision enbanc

 

Boy she really pours it to him. "The city ordinance mandates firearm training in order to execise the right and at the same time bans training facilities"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unbelieveable. I only wish Gura had sought a stay of the training requirement on top ofthe range injunction as icing on the cake

 

Those judges look like they saw right through what the city was trying to do. Gura just didnt pick up on what the one judge was trying to hint at that the city could create zoning that made it to expensive to operate a range

 

My only fear is that posner or eaterbrook grab a good decision and take it enbanc to try and muck it up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...