Jump to content


Photo

SAF Sues Illinois Over Foster Parents' Civil Rights


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#1 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,265 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 12 July 2016 - 08:27 PM

From https://www.saf.org/...s-civil-rights/

----------

BELLEVUE, WA The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a lawsuit against the State of Illinois on behalf of two foster parents, alleging deprivation of civil rights under color of law.

The lawsuit is joined by the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA) on behalf of Kenneth and Colleen Schults in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois. Named as a defendant in the case is George H. Sheldon, in his official capacity as director of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (IDCFS).

The complaint contends that Mr. and Mrs. Schults have been denied their rights because IDCFS policy substantially prohibits foster parents, and those who would like to be foster parents, from possessing firearms for the purpose of self-defense. This violates their constitutional rights under the Second Amendment.

"After the number of times weve had to take legal action in Illinois, including our landmark U.S. Supreme Court Second Amendment victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago six years ago, one would think the state would have wised up by now," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "But here we are again, working with ISRA, fighting for the rights of law-abiding citizens in that state."

SAF and its co-plaintiffs seek to establish that the state's restrictions on the possession and carrying of firearms by foster parents is unconstitutional under both the Second and Fourteenth amendments.

"It was our legal action against Chicagos handgun ban that incorporated the Second Amendment to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment," Gottlieb recalled. "It was another of our lawsuits that forced the State Legislature to adopt a concealed carry statute in Illinois. Now were in court to make sure that the state cannot discriminate against foster parents who merely wish to exercise the rights we've restored in Illinois."

.

Edited by kwc, 12 July 2016 - 08:30 PM.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#2 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,635 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 12 July 2016 - 08:31 PM

So glad to see SAF take up another challenge in Illinois!  Thank you, Second Amendment Foundation!


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#3 RoadyRunner

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,774 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 12

Posted 12 July 2016 - 09:07 PM

uploadfromtaptalk1468379266515.jpg

IC Supporting member
NRA life member
NRA certified Basic Pistol Instructor

Illinois Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

 


#4 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,374 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 12 July 2016 - 09:30 PM

I love it when the SAF comes to town.

.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#5 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,231 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 12 July 2016 - 10:05 PM

Outstanding.


Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#6 409gary

  • Members
  • 39 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 16

Posted 13 July 2016 - 04:35 AM

I hope the SAF is awarded some type of sanctions in this case.  It seems like the State of Illinois 

has adopted the position that the 2nd Amendment does not exist, and that it will only abide by the

law when forced to do so by the Courts.    


Federal Firearms Licensee

Member: 2nd Amend Foundation-Life Member

Member: NRA Benefactor-Life Member

Member: National Shooting Sports Foundation

Member: Illinois State Rifle Association

Member: Browning Collectors Association

US Army, Second Armored Division


#7 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,534 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 13 July 2016 - 04:41 AM

Since this is a DCFS policy, Governor Rauner could easily issue an executive order to overturn it and make the lawsuit go away, saving the state a lot of money in legal fees.


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#8 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,265 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 13 July 2016 - 04:48 AM

Plaintiffs are represented by--you guessed it--attorney David Sigale, who has been deeply involved in prior successful 2A lawsuits in Illinois as well as a similar foster parent lawsuit in Oklahoma:

https://www.saf.org/...ervices-policy/

SAF continues to do very impressive work on behalf of free Americans!
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#9 WARFACE

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,033 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 13

Posted 13 July 2016 - 06:51 AM

I love it when the SAF comes to town.

Too bad they won't work on the FOID issue.


Aspire to be the kind of person your dog thinks you are.


#10 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,635 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 13 July 2016 - 12:58 PM

 

I love it when the SAF comes to town.

Too bad they won't work on the FOID issue.

 

 

 

The FOID issue is not one likely to be won in court without other cases laying a foundation of judicial rulings.  It would not be wise to take on that battle and lose.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#11 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,265 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 13 July 2016 - 02:14 PM

SAF does a good job of deliberate planning, selecting cases that they can use as building blocks in future endeavors. They'll occasionally even tackle cases that have little or nothing to do with 2A issues. I don't know how FOID concerns factor into their strategy. Perhaps someday, when the timing is right, it will get the level of attention it needs.
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#12 Sigma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,949 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 09

Posted 13 July 2016 - 02:49 PM

good idea for those that arent a member of nra isra or goa to consider saf


Exodus 22:2-3
If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.

Gun control is not about guns, it's about control. Once they have all the guns, they'll also have complete control.-Abolt

Guns kill people just like beds get girls pregnant.

#13 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Admin
  • 17,374 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 13 July 2016 - 07:15 PM

I love it when the SAF comes to town.

Too bad they won't work on the FOID issue.


That's more involved than just repealing the FOID Act. It's intertwined with a lot of things and we'd have to be careful to not lose things like preemption.

.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Advanced Digital Media Link ..........Blue Room Stream Link

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. (Ephesians 4:31)

 

On 5/25/2017, Superintendent Eddie Johnson predicted a 50% reduction is Chicago violence within 3 years of SB1722 becoming law.  The bill was signed into law on 6/23/2017. The clock is now ticking.


#14 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,231 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 13 July 2016 - 09:58 PM

Since this is a DCFS policy, Governor Rauner could easily issue an executive order to overturn it and make the lawsuit go away, saving the state a lot of money in legal fees.

There are a lot of executive actions that could be taken all over the executive branch, if he were so inclined to do so.


Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#15 vezpa

    Illinoiscarry.com Funnyman

  • Members
  • 4,285 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 13 July 2016 - 10:40 PM

How the state can even try to defend this is beyond me.  Proving once again with Illinois you just cant fix stupid.

 

.


Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those

who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.

                                                    

                                                                                                                                                     

                                                                    - Thomas Jefferson


#16 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,635 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 14 July 2016 - 09:26 AM

The policy was put into effect when, I believe, a 13 year old foster child got access to a firearm and committed suicide?


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#17 Cerus

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,166 posts
  • Joined: 24-January 16

Posted 14 July 2016 - 10:06 AM

$Everyone knows the FOID act keeps criminals from acquiring firearms so it keeps gun crime super low compared to every other state.$

In all seriousness, I doubt it will ever go away. I've come to the conclusion that IL laws aren't meant to actually prevent any sort of illegal activity and are merely there for feel good reasons. If the FOID act was repealed our streets would be flooded with bad guys with guns.

#18 Xwing

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,596 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 09

Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:28 PM

I was glad to see this today at the top of FoxNews.  Good for the SAF.  Interesting comment above though.  If indeed this is just policy and can be changed by the governor, that would be great.  Gov. Rauner is both a smart businessman and at least reasonably pro-2a.  It would be a win/win to change the policy and not have to pay to fight the lawsuit...


NRA Lifetime Member
IGOLD 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
CCW - 50 State Firearm Laws: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Posted anti-gun business listing: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Gun Range Tools & Logs: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Illinois Government: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)


#19 sirflyguy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,713 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 09

Posted 17 July 2016 - 04:50 AM

http://www.foxnews.c...uit-claims.html


Defensive Firearms Coach (DFC)

Fundamentals of Home Defense Handgun

Fundamentals of Concealed Carry
NRA-Certified Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA-Certified Personal Protection In the Home Instructor
NRA-Certified Personal Protection Outside the Home Instructor 
NRA-Certified Chief Range Safety Officer

IL FCCA Approved Instructor
http://www.mlftraining.com
https://www.facebook...ps/mlftraining/


#20 Hoffsoft

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Joined: 16-June 08

Posted 17 July 2016 - 10:39 AM

SAF does great work on the legal front, and then Alan Gottleib babbles about how we need to embrace UBCs and endorsed Manchin-Toomey.  I wish there was a way I could just donate to the legal side and not give a dime to Alan Gottleib. 



#21 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,379 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 28 July 2016 - 07:47 AM

Father is a firearms instructor, licensed shop manager (by IDFPR). Mother is an RN (licensed by IDFPR) at a correctional institution. But the state implies they're too reckless/careless to have a foster child in a home with firearms. Yeah, ok. It's OK if the kids are "yours," biologically speaking. Not if they're not "yours." Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#22 Rcpandr

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • Joined: 12-June 13

Posted 29 July 2016 - 08:06 AM

Would be nice to add in the 10,000 home daycare providers in this state that are not allowed to even have a handgun in the house. In a letter we received they are even considering requiring posting.

#23 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 14,635 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 29 July 2016 - 08:37 AM

Would be nice to add in the 10,000 home daycare providers in this state that are not allowed to even have a handgun in the house. In a letter we received they are even considering requiring posting.


I would dearly love a copy of that letter! Please email a copy to vrowe(at) Illinoiscarry.com
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#24 IH8IL

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 13

Posted 29 July 2016 - 08:51 AM

Would be nice to add in the 10,000 home daycare providers in this state that are not allowed to even have a handgun in the house. In a letter we received they are even considering requiring posting.


Not even if they are locked up? I'm tired of the mentality that if you have firearms, you must be crazy. A handgun makes you extra crazy.

#25 Rcpandr

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • Joined: 12-June 13

Posted 03 August 2016 - 12:06 AM

Home day cares cannot have a handgun on the property. "16) Handguns are prohibited on the premises of the day care home except in the
possession of peace officers or other adults who must possess a handgun as a
condition of employment and who reside in the day care home.
17) Any firearm, other than a handgun in the possession of a peace officer or
other person as provided in subsection (a)(13), shall be kept in a
disassembled state, without ammunition, in locked storage in a closet,
cabinet, or other locked storage facility inaccessible to children.
A) Ammunition for such firearms shall be kept in locked storage
separate from that of the disassembled firearms, inaccessible to
children."

#26 Rcpandr

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • Joined: 12-June 13

Posted 03 August 2016 - 12:20 AM

https://www.dropbox....d_gdc).pdf?dl=0


https://www.dropbox....r_2015.pdf?dl=0

#27 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,379 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 03 August 2016 - 08:01 AM

I love how the state has no problem (it does, it just cannot do a bleepin thing about it) if parents own guns. As long as their children are the biological children of the parents. But when you throw in wards of the state, that's when it becomes dicey. Can't trust that they won't get their hands on one of their foster parent's firearms. Isn't that an implicit statement that wards of the state are sub-human, equal protection doesn't apply? Biological children, ok. Foster children, absolutely not. The difference? In the end, nothing. No difference between the two until the state made a statutory distinction, classifying that wards of the state cannot be trusted with anything. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#28 TRJ

    Joyful Stoic

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 6,888 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 14

Posted 03 August 2016 - 08:38 AM

I love how the state has no problem (it does, it just cannot do a bleepin thing about it) if parents own guns. As long as their children are the biological children of the parents. But when you throw in wards of the state, that's when it becomes dicey. Can't trust that they won't get their hands on one of their foster parent's firearms. Isn't that an implicit statement that wards of the state are sub-human, equal protection doesn't apply? Biological children, ok. Foster children, absolutely not. The difference? In the end, nothing. No difference between the two until the state made a statutory distinction, classifying that wards of the state cannot be trusted with anything.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk


Not saying I agree with the state's thinking, but I think they are looking at this from the angle that says if you are negligent in securing guns in your house and YOUR kids hurt self/other that's tragic and YOUR problem. If you are negligent in securing guns in your house and OUR kids hurt self/others it's OUR problem. I think it's a LOT of "CYA" in the policy. I think it disregards the 2nd and the suit is proper, but I suspect it's less a malicious policy and more a pragmatic solution reached by an overworked social worker who has political leanings toward favoring big government.

#29 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,379 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 06 August 2016 - 08:42 AM

If you're negligent in securing your firearms, then that's an entirely separate issue and DCFS needs to get involved if the couple has children. Period. I do not advocate reckless storage, propping up a rifle against a wall, placing a loaded pistol on a night stand or in the drawer. They cannot make a blanket "Well, you own guns, so you're probably an idiot who doesn't keep them in a safe, so we'll just make some idiotic law...." The road to heck is paved with good intentions. I agree, there is a public safety issue here but they cannot just say "you own guns, bad parents." Bare minimum the provision is unconstitutional as applied, due to the simple fact that both parents hold occupational licenses (the mother is a state employee) and the father is also a firearms instructor. The state claiming that the couple cannot have a foster child because the kid "might" break into a gun safe is ludicrous. I have a child and I store all of my firearms accordingly. She can't get into anything....yet. But she will, and I'm ready for it. Unfortunately this case arises from irresponsible gun owners, parents, mucking it up for the rest of us. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#30 lockman

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,586 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 06

Posted 07 August 2016 - 09:13 AM

If you're negligent in securing your firearms, then that's an entirely separate issue and DCFS needs to get involved if the couple has children. Period. I do not advocate reckless storage, propping up a rifle against a wall, placing a loaded pistol on a night stand or in the drawer. They cannot make a blanket "Well, you own guns, so you're probably an idiot who doesn't keep them in a safe, so we'll just make some idiotic law...." The road to heck is paved with good intentions.

I agree, there is a public safety issue here but they cannot just say "you own guns, bad parents." Bare minimum the provision is unconstitutional as applied, due to the simple fact that both parents hold occupational licenses (the mother is a state employee) and the father is also a firearms instructor. The state claiming that the couple cannot have a foster child because the kid "might" break into a gun safe is ludicrous. I have a child and I store all of my firearms accordingly. She can't get into anything....yet. But she will, and I'm ready for it. Unfortunately this case arises from irresponsible gun owners, parents, mucking it up for the rest of us.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk


Get the foster kids FOID cards. Put the foster kids who get FOID's into homes of gun owners and those that cannot get FOID's ( disqualified ) to non gun owning families. /light purple

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1776

Life Member NRA, ISRA,  CCRKBA, GOA, & SAF





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users