Craigcr2 Posted October 28, 2020 at 10:27 PM Share Posted October 28, 2020 at 10:27 PM This one was filed in the SDIL last week. Hes basically going after everything with counts challenging FOID processing, fees for FOID/CCL, melting point, and transfers taking longer than 72 hours. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilsd.86072/gov.uscourts.ilsd.86072.1.0.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InterestedBystander Posted October 28, 2020 at 10:38 PM Share Posted October 28, 2020 at 10:38 PM ..."That Defendant Gregory Hacker (“Hacker”) is the Chief of the Illinois State Police Firearms Services Bureau, and is responsible for the processing of FOID card applications and the issuance of FOID cards."... This one is a new name for me. Illinois State Police - 4 years 2 months Lieutenant / Acting Commander Firearms Services Bureau - Jan 2020 - Present 10 months Master Sergeant / Office of Labor Relations and Special Projects - Oct 2017 - Jan 2020 2 years 4 months Master Sergeant / Mansion Detail Leader / Executive Protection Unit - Sep 2016 - Sep 2017 1 year 1 month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted October 28, 2020 at 11:06 PM Share Posted October 28, 2020 at 11:06 PM This one was filed in the SDIL last week. Hes basically going after everything with counts challenging FOID processing, fees for FOID/CCL, melting point, and transfers taking longer than 72 hours. https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilsd.86072/gov.uscourts.ilsd.86072.1.0.pdf A case like this is ripe to be run all the way up to the Supreme Court, imagine the field day the Supreme Court could have with all those infringing claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTX63 Posted October 28, 2020 at 11:54 PM Share Posted October 28, 2020 at 11:54 PM Giddy up! Yah! Hyah!"Fill Your Hand You ***"!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanC Posted October 29, 2020 at 12:55 AM Share Posted October 29, 2020 at 12:55 AM That is good news. Do you think courts may try to punt, as not have to rule on a second amendment case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigcr2 Posted October 29, 2020 at 01:44 AM Author Share Posted October 29, 2020 at 01:44 AM That is good news. Do you think courts may try to punt, as not have to rule on a second amendment case?On some counts, but it’s written well enough that the 2A is unavoidable on some. My biggest concern is a challenge to Rodgers’ standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted October 29, 2020 at 02:33 AM Share Posted October 29, 2020 at 02:33 AM That is good news. Do you think courts may try to punt, as not have to rule on a second amendment case?On some counts, but it’s written well enough that the 2A is unavoidable on some. My biggest concern is a challenge to Rodgers’ standing. IMO they may be able to challenge the not getting a FOID, by simply issuing it before court and the entire "I might get arrrested claim" but I don't see how they could dismiss their standing on anything else as it all revolves around deprivation of their rights. What Illinois courts will likely do it apply the horribly low standard to allow infringments of the 2nd, something that is ripe for appeal all the way up to the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigcr2 Posted October 29, 2020 at 11:27 AM Author Share Posted October 29, 2020 at 11:27 AM That is good news. Do you think courts may try to punt, as not have to rule on a second amendment case? On some counts, but it’s written well enough that the 2A is unavoidable on some. My biggest concern is a challenge to Rodgers’ standing. IMO they may be able to challenge the not getting a FOID, by simply issuing it before court and the entire "I might get arrrested claim" but I don't see how they could dismiss their standing on anything else as it all revolves around deprivation of their rights. What Illinois courts will likely do it apply the horribly low standard to allow infringments of the 2nd, something that is ripe for appeal all the way up to the top.Standing is hard for a claim when the injury is anticipated. A good example is the melting point challenge. He wants to buy a zinc gun at some point in the future but won’t be able to. The court is going to look at this differently than they would if he already ordered a zinc gun, but his FFL couldn’t transfer it; then there’s an actual injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silhouette Posted October 29, 2020 at 03:40 PM Share Posted October 29, 2020 at 03:40 PM I would anticipate that this case will be significantly narrowed based on standing, and delays notwithstanding, some elements will be mooted by eventual issuance of a FOID card to the individual. We have seen similar machinations with people under 21 applying for FOID cards. However, the count regarding the fees for the FOID cards could well be a very interesting one. Rulings on this count could affect the existence of the FOID fee, future lawsuits by others regarding their own fees, and even the existence of the FOID. Would a ruling on the Foid Fee permit other cases requesting fees and attorneys fees under Section 1983? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted October 30, 2020 at 03:38 AM Share Posted October 30, 2020 at 03:38 AM Talk about a "laundry list" of complaints - WOW !I wish Mr. Rogers and his lawyer(s) the best of luck ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.