Craigcr2 Posted July 27, 2020 at 02:19 PM Share Posted July 27, 2020 at 02:19 PM Does anyone know how long ISP has to file a response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted August 7, 2020 at 07:00 AM Share Posted August 7, 2020 at 07:00 AM The “police power” is a constitutional law term that predates the modern concept of a police departments or officers. Here’s the definition from a legal dictionary “ Police power describes the basic right of governments to make laws and regulations for the benefit of their communities.” https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Police+PowerI facepalmed when reading the IL AG's filing in one of the cases, that defined the police power as being the Illinois State Police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deerhuntre Posted August 12, 2020 at 04:26 PM Share Posted August 12, 2020 at 04:26 PM If it can help this case or anywhere else with the efforts: A friend of mine is on day 134 'under review' for a new, first time, FOID application. Should I have him contact anyone with this info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichieRich Posted August 12, 2020 at 06:29 PM Share Posted August 12, 2020 at 06:29 PM If it can help this case or anywhere else with the efforts: A friend of mine is on day 134 'under review' for a new, first time, FOID application. Should I have him contact anyone with this info?In my opinion it would be a waste of time unless you have a high powered attorney. I've been "under board review" since March for my CCL. I've attempted to call and got nowhere. You can call but the chances of getting in contact with someone is slim to none. Hopefully with the new appointments, things get rolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinois_buckeye Posted August 12, 2020 at 09:44 PM Share Posted August 12, 2020 at 09:44 PM What you can try, which is what I did, they open at 8:30 AM. Call at about 8:27. By the time you wait through the menus, it should be 8:30. With any luck you will be one of the first in the call queue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted August 21, 2020 at 03:39 AM Share Posted August 21, 2020 at 03:39 AM The “police power” is a constitutional law term that predates the modern concept of a police departments or officers. Here’s the definition from a legal dictionary “ Police power describes the basic right of governments to make laws and regulations for the benefit of their communities.” https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Police+PowerI facepalmed when reading the IL AG's filing in one of the cases, that defined the police power as being the Illinois State Police. Someone explained Police Powers in one of the threads AND it matched up with several encyclopedia explanations.I say we encourage the state to use that definition as it is WRONG. I would also add, where is the lawsuit to deep six the FOID in its entirety? What other RITE requires a LICENSE, and INFRINGES on the 2nd amendment, in violation of the 14th Amendment ? Where is my permit to prevent illegal searches and seizures, or the permit or license to avoid incriminating ones self, how about a 1st amendment permit to speak about greivences about the government? Yea Yea Yea the FOID does SOOOOOO MUCH GOOD in keeping guns out of people hands that shouldn't have them!!!! To that I say one word, "CHICAGO". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigcr2 Posted August 28, 2020 at 05:55 PM Share Posted August 28, 2020 at 05:55 PM Do we have anyone with access to PACER that can check the status? My understanding is that the rules of civil procedure gives the ISP 21 days to respond. Have they or has an extension been filed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunuser17 Posted August 28, 2020 at 10:07 PM Share Posted August 28, 2020 at 10:07 PM MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Defendants' unopposed motion for an extension of time until 9/17/2020 to respond to plaintiffs' complaint 10 is granted. Mailed notice. (kp, ) (Entered: 08/10/2020) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colt guy Posted August 28, 2020 at 10:50 PM Share Posted August 28, 2020 at 10:50 PM MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Defendants' unopposed motion for an extension of time until 9/17/2020 to respond to plaintiffs' complaint 10 is granted. Mailed notice. (kp, ) (Entered: 08/10/2020)How shocking in Illinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigcr2 Posted September 22, 2020 at 02:10 PM Share Posted September 22, 2020 at 02:10 PM Has the ISP filed a response or for another extension? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunuser17 Posted September 22, 2020 at 07:36 PM Share Posted September 22, 2020 at 07:36 PM 9/12/2020 Defendants Kelly and Trame moved to dismiss complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Opposition briefing and reply briefing to be completed by Nov. 3, 2020. Motion to dismiss is based on :the Individual Plaintiffs’ claims are moot and the Organizational Plaintiffs lack standing; as such, this Court should dismiss the complaint in its entirety. Further, this case is factually similar to Thomas et al. v. Illinois State Police et al., Case No. 20-CV-734, which was filed by the same attorneys and Organizational Plaintiffs in the Northern District of Illinois on January 31, 2020, and assigned to Judge Mary M. Rowland. As discussed in the Defendants’ memorandum in support of their motion to reassign this case as related, 20-CV-734 ECF. No. 29, the plaintiffs in Thomas allege very similar claims to those alleged by the Individual Plaintiffs in this case. Specifically, both cases include allegations that the plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights were violated by Defendants’ administration of the FOID Card Act. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss and supporting memorandum in Thomas on August 24, 2020, 20-CV-734 ECF Nos. 26-27, which has not been fully briefed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:01 PM Share Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:01 PM the plaintiffs in Thomas allege very similar claims to those alleged by the Individual Plaintiffs in this case. Specifically, both cases include allegations that the plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights were violated by Defendants’ administration of the FOID Card Act. If I was a Judge I would deny the motion and quote that part in the denial saying the multiple allegations appears to allege a broad denial of rights by the state that is a cause for concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.