169 replies to this topic

[InterestedBystander]

3/22/19 update
Deerfield loses. One more count to be heard 5/3/19.
Discussion begins here
http://illinoiscarry...=5#entry1203837

===========
EDIT

GSL / NRA
https://www.nraila.o...llinois-lawsuit

http://www.gunssavel...e-nras-support/

ISRA / SAF
http://www.isra.org/...ril-5-2018.aspx

Court date July 5, 2018
Case 18CH00000427
============

https://capitolfax.c...?p=37336&more=1

So far I have only been able to find this reported at Capitol Fax and not at NRA-ILA or GSL

NRA
The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today announced support for a lawsuit brought by Guns Save Life challenging the Village of Deerfield, Illinois gun confiscation ordinance. The lawsuit challenges Deerfields recent attempt to criminalize so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazines within village limits.

Every law-abiding villager of Deerfield has the right to protect themselves, their homes, and their loved ones with the firearm that best suits their needs, said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA-ILA.

The National Rifle Association is pleased to assist Guns Save Life in defense of this freedom. By amending an existing 2013 ordinance, the Village Board of Trustees has now empowered local authorities to confiscate and destroy all so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazines possessed within village limits. The amendment also imposes a daily fine ranging between $250 and $1,000.

We are going to fight this ordinance, which clearly violates our members constitutional rights, and with the help of the NRA I believe we can secure a victory for law-abiding gun owners in and around Deerfield, said John Boch, president of Guns Save Life.

Edited by InterestedBystander, 13 June 2019 - 11:26 AM.

[Woodrift]

Hopefully we win this one. Gun owners beat California after they tried to ban magazines over 10 rounds but offered no compensation.

Edited by Woodrift, 04 April 2018 - 04:44 PM.

[kevinmcc]

[BobPistol]

Release the hounds

[deerhuntre]

Wonderful news, Mortimer!!!!

[blck10th]

Was listening to joe Walsh on AM560 earlier. He was all over this topic Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Scipio24]

Release the hounds

Well said lol

[InterestedBystander]

Updated URLs

https://www.nraila.o...inois-lawsuit-1

http://www.gunssavel...e-nras-support/

Lawsuit
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 4, 2018
SUPPORT NRA-ILA
Fairfax, Va. The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today announced support for a lawsuit brought by Guns Save Life challenging the Village of Deerfield, Illinois gun confiscation ordinance. The lawsuit challenges Deerfields recent attempt to criminalize so-called assault weapons and high capacity magazines within village limits.

View Related Articles
Every law-abiding villager of Deerfield has the right to protect themselves, their homes, and their loved ones with the firearm that best suits their needs, said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA-ILA. The National Rifle Association is pleased to assist Guns Save Life in defense of this freedom.

By amending an existing 2013 ordinance, the Village Board of Trustees has now empowered local authorities to confiscate and destroy all so-called assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines possessed within village limits. The amendment also imposes a daily fine ranging between $250 and $1,000.

We are going to fight this ordinance, which clearly violates our member's constitutional rights, and with the help of the NRA I believe we can secure a victory for law-abiding gun owners in and around Deerfield, said John Boch, president of Guns Save Life.

Edited by InterestedBystander, 05 April 2018 - 05:58 PM.

[JDW]

Great news. WTG, GSL and NRA-ILA. 

[Jeckler]

That didn't take long....

[InterestedBystander]

That didn't take long....

Thought I had read a while ago they assisted with another lawsuit in a different state so the template/general format was probably already existing. Plus this has been like 6 weeks or more in the making being discussed at 3 board meetings so there was time to prepare.

[tricolor]

Good stuff, time to get in their wallets!  I'd love to see a couple hundred thousand dollar check cut by Deer-field....

[Dx54r]

How do they plan on enforcing the 1000 dollars per day malarkey? I say we everyone on the board that voted for this garbage owns an assault rifle and owes the city 250 per day until they prove it by opening their homes to the public.Lol

[Mr. Fife]

Hopefully GSL will have standing to sue Deerfield by having some GSL members living in Deerfield. I'm not a lawyer but I know the NRA has a lot of good ones. Glad to see the NRA hasn't abandoned Illinois.

[borgranta]

Hopefully GSL will have standing to sue Deerfield by having some GSL members living in Deerfield. I'm not a lawyer but I know the NRA has a lot of good ones. Glad to see the NRA hasn't abandoned Illinois.

Would GSL have standing if one or more GSL members were to possess 15 magazine within village limits while passing through?  Would GSL have standing if one or more GSL members were to possess 15 magazine within village limits while visiting family?  

[Euler]

Would GSL have standing if one or more GSL members were to possess 15 magazine within village limits while passing through?  Would GSL have standing if one or more GSL members were to possess 15 magazine within village limits while visiting family?

Transportation is covered by Federal law, with some modification by state law. You could be driving through Deerfield from Nevada to North Dakota with a full-auto M16 in your trunk. Neither Illinois nor Deerfield could do anything about that (as long as it stays in the trunk).

If your endpoint is family in Deerfield, however, maybe you have standing. IANAL. I think it would be an uphill battle just to prove standing. Do you and your family have a history of doing something within Deerfield limits with your 15-round magazines? Trolling the city council wouldn't count as standing.

[Mr. Fife]

Hopefully GSL will have standing to sue Deerfield by having some GSL members living in Deerfield. I'm not a lawyer but I know the NRA has a lot of good ones. Glad to see the NRA hasn't abandoned Illinois.


Would GSL have standing if one or more GSL members were to possess 15 magazine within village limits while passing through?  Would GSL have standing if one or more GSL members were to possess 15 magazine within village limits while visiting family?  

Maybe if you got arrested in Deerfield? Not sure how that standing thing works.

[NakPPI]

Standing is going to turn on how they're challenging the ordinance and which parts of it. You have to be impacted by the ordinance in some way to have standing. There are various points that violate preemption, but until they try to enforce it against a FOID holder or CCL holder it's a grey area. Say a FOID holder in Deerfield files suit challenging the transportation section. Deerfield could amend the ordinance to say it doesn't apply to FOID holders and the suit becomes moot. Deerfield would be insane to fight that law suit, the preemption case law is quite clear in Illinois, but hey this is Illinois municipalities routinely thumb their noses at state law and wait to be sued to change it. If the challenge is based on 2A, it loses because the Highland Park case is still binding case law. The only point of that is to get it to SCOTUS. Either way, they'll find a Deerfield resident that's a member. Probably a WWII veteran or some such. Friedman is retired Navy. Example of above: http://caselaw.findl...it/1878480.html Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Edited by NakPPI, 05 April 2018 - 07:08 AM.

[cybermgk]

[jagt48]

I didn't look too hard, but couldn't find if Deerfield had any ordinances on the books from the original ten day window. Anyone know? Or is this non-amended, new ordinance passed in violation of state law?

[InterestedBystander]

I didn't look too hard, but couldn't find if Deerfield had any ordinances on the books from the original ten day window. Anyone know? Or is this non-amended, new ordinance passed in violation of state law?

Original 10 day passed ordinance was an "assault weapon" storage and transportation law. This was amended to include the ban.

[NakPPI]

Apparently the transportation section does exempt FOID holders so that's a bad example. Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[mchenryill]

Is the ISRA lawsuit filed today a separate suit?

[dukemason]

That's great!

[soylentgreen]

HERE is why I'm an NRA life member.

[skinnyb82]

Hopefully we win this one. Gun owners beat California after they tried to ban magazines over 10 rounds but offered no compensation.

And lost on appeal. The government can get away with seizing private property without recompense as long as they make some (pathetic) showing that it's in furtherance of public safety. Not some eminent domain case.

I hope they threw in an Eighth Amendment excessive fines clause pleading. Since $1k/day is downright absurd and more than the fine for a DUI. Or was when I got mine.

[InterestedBystander]

Is the ISRA lawsuit filed today a separate suit?

Think so. It is the ISRA and SAF. One is never enough! ;-)

http://www.isra.org/...ril-5-2018.aspx

ISRA ALERT - April 5, 2018

4/5/2018

The Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) have filed a lawsuit against the Village of Deerfield this morning, April 5, 2018. This legal action is a challenge to the Defendants Ordinance O-18-06, passed on April 2, 2018, which bans assault weapons (used specifically as that term is defined in O-18-06) within the Defendants municipal limits.

The suit was filed In the Circuit Court of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Lake County, Illinois, Chancery Division.

To make a contribution to the Illinois State Rifle Association Legal Assistance Committee, please donate here.

Please join the ISRA NOW!

Edited by InterestedBystander, 05 April 2018 - 12:18 PM.

[mchenryill]

Good, the more the merrier.

[SiliconSorcerer]

HERE is why I'm an NRA life member.

 

That's one and why I just went to an endowment member, like them are not, it's one place to be counted. 

[Woodrift]

Hopefully we win this one. Gun owners beat California after they tried to ban magazines over 10 rounds but offered no compensation.

And lost on appeal. The government can get away with seizing private property without recompense as long as they make some (pathetic) showing that it's in furtherance of public safety. Not some eminent domain case.
I hope they threw in an Eighth Amendment excessive fines clause pleading. Since $1k/day is downright absurd and more than the fine for a DUI. Or was when I got mine.

Forgive my ignorance, but every article I come across regarding their Proposition 63 that outlawed grandfathered "high capacity magazines" (those that were purchased before 2000) was shot down by a Federal judge. The court agreed with the plaintiffs that confiscation of the magazines violated the Fifth Amendments prohibition on the taking of property for public use without compensation.

When did they lose the appeal?