Jump to content

Shepard update 4/13


Recommended Posts

The state filed a motion to stay Shepard pending Moore at the appellate level. We objected to it. I just received word the state's motion was denied. Additionally, We filed a motion to have the two cases combined and it was granted we will now be heard with Moore we have filed our brief in the appeal and await the state's response

 

Good news all the way around

 

Now back to my regularlly scheduled vacation. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The state filed a motion to stay Shepard pending Moore at the appellate level. We objected to it. I just received word the state's motion was denied. Additionally, We filed a motion to have the two cases combined and it was granted we will now be heard with Moore we have filed our brief in the appeal and await the state's response

 

Good news all the way around

 

Now back to my regularlly scheduled vacation. . .

 

I have no idea what this means, but nice to see a little good news for a change...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Denying the states motion means we dont get put on hold

 

Combining the cases means they will be heard together with devided time at orals more than likely

 

It also means that despite the lateness of our ruling we are not behind Moore we are starting at the appellate level at the same time neither case is in front of the other. A ruling on either will be a ruling for both and we are closer to SCOTUS no matter who looses there will be an appeal unless we were to win the appeal and the AG decided not to fight it any longer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A ruling on either will be a ruling for both and we are closer to SCOTUS no matter who looses there will be an appeal unless we were to win the appeal and the AG decided not to fight it any longer

 

And the question that shall eventually end up at the Supreme Court is this:

 

Does "the right of the people to keep and bear arms", as stated in the constitution, mean that "the people have the right to bear arms?" Remember ... the "keep" part of the guarantee has now (finally) been affirmed. Next up is affirmation of the "bear" part of the guarantee. Heller made it clear that the second amendment protects two rights ... the right to keep, and the right to bear, arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A ruling on either will be a ruling for both and we are closer to SCOTUS no matter who looses there will be an appeal unless we were to win the appeal and the AG decided not to fight it any longer

 

And the question that shall eventually end up at the Supreme Court is this:

 

Does "the right of the people to keep and bear arms", as stated in the constitution, mean that "the people have the right to bear arms?" Remember ... the "keep" part of the guarantee has now (finally) been affirmed. Next up is affirmation of the "bear" part of the guarantee. Heller made it clear that the second amendment protects two rights ... the right to keep, and the right to bear, arms.

Which is why this upcoming election is SO crucial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a really good deal... The cases are similar issues with the defendant, Madigan, the same in both cases.

 

You must realize a lot can hang on this. If the 7th reaches out to remove a complete ban on the public carry arms, similar to North Carolina, Maryland and couple other cases last month there is the potential real explosive decompression of the Chicago Machine's bubbles and power..... Almost makes you drool to dream about that... However coming back to reality we will just have to wait and see what transpires....... Some real possibilities though...

 

Regards, Drd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a really good deal... The cases are similar issues with the defendant, Madigan, the same in both cases.

 

You must realize a lot can hang on this. If the 7th reaches out to remove a complete ban on the public carry arms, similar to North Carolina, Maryland and couple other cases last month there is the potential real explosive decompression of the Chicago Machine's bubbles and power..... Almost makes you drool to dream about that... However coming back to reality we will just have to wait and see what transpires....... Some real possibilities though...

 

Regards, Drd

 

Can you picture it now? A hot summer day on the magnificent mile, open-carrying your choice of revolver or auto and the criminal aldermen having nothing to do about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel that this is the best case scenario. There is no need to argue 2 cases in the same circuit. If there are 2 in CA7, putting SAF legal expertise with the very sympathetic plaintiff of Ms Sheppard seems like a Perfect Storm! I'm positive with this as well.

 

The penultimate goal is a persuasive Circuit Split for SCOTUS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the anticipated time-line for the consolidated case as it moves forward?

Meaning.... how long before the case is heard?

How long before we have a ruling?

How does this proceed from here?

If we lose at the 7th Circuit level, I know we would appeal, so long as the current SCOTUS remained.

If Chicago/Illinois loses do you think they would push it to SCOTUS or just let it go, since Illinois is the only state with this problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both SAF and NRA have filed their briefs. Now we will see how incompetent the AGs attorneys are. They took for ever answering the complainta and asked for more time. But they were quick to file a notice of supplimental authority when another case in another state went their way.

 

Will know more monday

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...