borgranta Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:52 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:52 PM · Hidden by Molly B., October 3, 2013 at 06:05 PM - No reason given Hidden by Molly B., October 3, 2013 at 06:05 PM - No reason given Wasn't Posner similarly "pisssy" on the prior appeal that it appeared he was annoyed with us?Maybe he has male PMS Link to comment
lockman Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:56 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:56 PM I think laws are trivial. Tell that to Woolard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango7 Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:58 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:58 PM Sounds like Posner thinks that self defense is trivial. I wonder if by preventing our side from talking he violated any of the court rules not that he cares. You would think it violates due process if nothing else. Why allow someone to file if you're just going to <bodily function> in their eye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prairie Eagle Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:59 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 03:59 PM Oh well win some lose some. I never had high hopes for this realistically anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFigmentOfYourImagination Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:04 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:04 PM Sounds like Posner thinks that self defense is trivial. I wonder if by preventing our side from talking he violated any of the court rules not that he cares Regarding the bolded section.....I have been trying to find rules of the court regarding exactly that. I am trying to browse through http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap but so far the only thing I've managed to find is a headache. Between the reduced amount of time, and the way that my peers who were in attendance indicate Mr. Posner conducted himself (quite hastily, imho), one may gather the impression that the outcome was already decided and just waiting to be handed down. Not saying that the "fix was in"....but I don't blame anybody that thinks it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twjones Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:04 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:04 PM If it's trivial, why even allow the appeal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googe1227 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:15 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:15 PM Yeah, that was rough. I've never seen anything like that.... :| Btw, I was the guy in the back with a beard and long hair who took off right after because I was late to work.I was sitting next to you. On your left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt-45 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:17 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:17 PM looks like the state will take all the time they want to get permits out to us know. hope they will appeal it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borgranta Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:24 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:24 PM Oh well win some lose some. I never had high hopes for this realistically anyway.I did not know that Posner was the only judge in the 7th circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scough Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:26 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:26 PM Oh, I'm guessing that April '14 just slid to end of year '14, if we're lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:28 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:28 PM Waited until my lunch break to check, figured there'd be something positive out of it. Doesn't seem to be the case. Did they actually confirm the case as moot or is the decision still pending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpearson Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:35 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:35 PM Still pending Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spec5 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:38 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:38 PM Decision no. A lot of Conjecture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cshipley92 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:40 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:40 PM I understand some of those in attendance thought this didn't go well for us. I'm waiting to hear from skinny or Todd. Not that I don't trust the word of others in attendance I'd just like their analysis of what went down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpearson Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:43 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:43 PM I understand some of those in attendance thought this didn't go well for us. I'm waiting to hear from skinny or Todd. Not that I don't trust the word of others in attendance I'd just like their analysis of what went down. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiburbian Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:45 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:45 PM Just wait until you hear it. At the last orals for this case in the 7th Posner was challenging but was asking questions that were essentially testing the limits of what is required by McDonald and Heller. This was more like Posner berating us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spec5 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:45 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:45 PM I understand some of those in attendance thought this didn't go well for us. I'm waiting to hear from skinny or Todd. Not that I don't trust the word of others in attendance I'd just like their analysis of what went down. I agree.Agreed, and it bothers me that we haven't heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt-45 Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:46 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:46 PM I understand some of those in attendance thought this didn't go well for us. I'm waiting to hear from skinny or Todd. Not that I don't trust the word of others in attendance I'd just like their analysis of what went down. I agree.look at it this way if it was good news they would already been on here telling us about it, so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpearson Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:47 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:47 PM What did posner ask?How many questions did he ask.More importatly what did they ask the state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm.stites Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:51 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:51 PM looks like the state will take all the time they want to get permits out to us know. hope they will appeal it.the state still has aquilar hanging over its head which alot of people seem to forget. the 7ths original ruling is now set as precedent by the ilsc thanks to aquilar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm.stites Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:52 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:52 PM I understand some of those in attendance thought this didn't go well for us. I'm waiting to hear from skinny or Todd. Not that I don't trust the word of others in attendance I'd just like their analysis of what went down.they are having coffee still so it will be a while haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borgranta Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:53 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 04:53 PM We still may get a good ruling especially if his behavior caused the other judges to feel more sympathic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANDY Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:00 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:00 PM Is there a chance that Posner didn't need anything from our side, and has already decided against the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpearson Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:01 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:01 PM Is there a chance that Posner didn't need anything from our side, and has already decided against the state.that is why i am more curious as to how they treated the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:03 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:03 PM I was there. Posner was very aggressive, and our side literally did not get a full sentence in more than a half dozen times or so in 20 minutes. You won't fully appreciate it until listening to the audio. It was pretty obvious he had made up his mind before arguments began. The other male judge (I forget his name) looked thoughtful and asked one or two relevant questions. The lady listened, and seemed to be thoughtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrowningHP Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:05 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:05 PM Posner basically kept asking for a compelling reason of what immediate injunction should be made and why any current complaints should not be handled in a separate lawsuit. Brown v. Board of Education was brought up repeatedly by Posner, wherein a law was found unconstitutional, but implementation of the new law happened at a slower pace. The judges did not seem convinced that the State be required to "immediately come in compliance" with the constitution, and that future complaints should be handled as separate lawsuits, which is apparently similar to what happened in Brown v. Board of Ed. His logic seems pretty reasonable IMHO, based on my very limited knowledge of how the law should work. They are asking us how they can implement injunctions without creating some pretty sweeping precedents. I'm not sure how much bias there really is with regards to the legal standpoint they have to work from. On one hand, I think this is not like Brown v. BoE because we're talking about personal security and not education, education can wait. On the other hand, Posner specifically brought up training and asked why he should order the State to allow FOID carriers without *any* training to carry loaded guns around. Our lawyers countered with "well, other states seem to allow it" but that didn't really budge Posner, who responded with something like "does that mean all the other States are automatically wrong"? Given the State is bound by law to issue permits within the next half year, until they fall out of compliance it's hard to complain. As much as I dislike the outcome, from what little I understand I agreed with a lot of his logic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:07 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:07 PM You guys want my analysis? Listen to the orals. Not once was Berlow interrupted and he actually answered a question that Flaum asked Thompson but Thompson couldn't answer it at the time. I'm gonna say this once: anyone accusing Judge Posner of taking a bribe or any other act of impropriety...for your sake I will ask you to keep that to yourself. If we lose that doesn't mean the judge was bought off. It just means the judge did not agree with our side. We win, we lose, but don't disrespect a judge who you were praising for the last 10 months just because he did not side with us. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hap Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:08 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:08 PM Well, if the court says it prefers to have future complaints handled as separate lawsuits, so be it. Meanwhile, we should probably at least wait for the court to hand down a decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiburbian Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:09 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:09 PM The judges did not ask a single question of the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supprmann Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:13 PM Share Posted October 3, 2013 at 05:13 PM You guys want my analysis? Listen to the orals. Not once was Berlow interrupted and he actually answered a question that Flaum asked Thompson but Thompson couldn't answer it at the time. I'm gonna say this once: anyone accusing Judge Posner of taking a bribe or any other act of impropriety...for your sake I will ask you to keep that to yourself. If we lose that doesn't mean the judge was bought off. It just means the judge did not agree with our side. We win, we lose, but don't disrespect a judge who you were praising for the last 10 months just because he did not side with us. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Dude.....I'm so glad you said it.....***whew*** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.