People v. Brown - FOID ruled unconstituional in IL District Court Once Again

[SiliconSorcerer]

 

How long until we have a National FOID?

Would it work?

 

There should be no cost for internet verification of the buyer.

It should eliminate all waiting periods nationwide once the check is approved.

It should allow the holder to buy any gun in person anywhere in the US.

 

The other 49 states would be p*****...

It already exists, sort of. I mean the FBI has a file on everyone already and all the disqualifying info is supposed to be correlated. People don't have a card but all the backend info is there. Illinois has all the same, the machinations of the physical FOID cards are just a silly game. It's all tied to state DL/ID cards anyway, it would be trivial and save millions of dollars to do away with the FOID "system". At this point it's all a show to keep up appearances and maintain power by playing games with a physical card.

 

It's like fingerprinting, they make a big stink out of it, but already have facial recognition on everyone already so why bother? Just another game to distract people.

 

 

I think the same for paying per mile for gas, got a phone? High, low gas milage or no gas, everyone wears down roads...

[DaveIL]

https://courts.illinois.gov/SupremeCourt/Docket/2020/Jan/01-20DB.pdf

 

if someone already posted this and I didn't see it I apologize.. Her case is listed on the "Advisement Docket"? I Don't know what that means but maybe I missed something?

[RANDY]

Possibly argued but not decided as of the time of the case listing.

[tkroenlein]

What is the typical time frame for issuing a ruling?

[Silhouette]

Someone may have more updated statistics but:

 

" In 2013, unanimous decisions came down an average of 103.7 days after oral argument, while cases with dissenters took much longer – 185.8 days after argument."

 

per https://www.appellatestrategist.com/2014/03/articles/jurisdictions/illinois/whats-pending-on-the-illinois-supreme-courts-advisement-docket/

[Molly B.]

The court has announced the decision will be released this Thursday.

[mrmagloo]

Whoa, very welcome news! Got my fingers and toes crossed!

[KHJ]

Molly, what’s your gut instinct on this?

[Molly B.]

I have none, except whichever way it goes there will most likely be an appeal?

[John Q Public]

What Molly said...

[EdDinIL]

The next step after the IL Supreme Court would be... SCOTUS itself, or a Federal appeals court?

[Molly B.]

I believe it would be U.S. Supreme Court.

[TomKoz]

If appealed, what another 2 years or so for THAT ruling?

[chislinger]

If appealed, what another 2 years or so for THAT ruling?

I don't see an issue in a ruling against the state that they could appeal. A ruling against us could be appealed on 2A grounds.

[Rangerdeepv]

Keeping more than fingers and toes crossed. Surprised they are leading the SCOTUS on this one, although it seems the ISC does not care if any of their decisions are over turned.

[erikweso1]

The court has announced the decision will be released this Thursday.

By chance, do you have a link handy in which I may check their decision as soon as it is posted? Thank you very much in advance, link or no link.

[John Q Public]

No worries, it will be posted here post-haste.

[F12Mahon]

Looks like this is what you could type in your browser address bar.

 

http://illinoiscourts.gov/Opinions/recent_supreme.asp

 

(under edit) Or just click on the link above.

 

Eugene

Edited March 31, 2020 at 11:09 PM by F12Mahon

[erikweso1]

Looks like this is what you could type in your browser address bar.

 

http://illinoiscourts.gov/Opinions/recent_supreme.asp

 

(under edit) Or just click on the link above.

 

Eugene

Thank you Sir

[burningspear]

The Illinois Supreme Court may not agree with me, but here is my view, which is more expansive than the narrow issue presented in Brown: Although there are a few exceptions, all Illinois residents who do not have a FOID card are prohibited from possessing a firearm. This is a total ban, a blanket prohibition, that obliterates the right to keep and bear arms.

[Badger52]

The Illinois Supreme Court may not agree with me, but here is my view, which is more expansive than the narrow issue presented in Brown: Although there are a few exceptions, all Illinois residents who do not have a FOID card are prohibited from possessing a firearm. This is a total ban, a blanket prohibition, that obliterates the right to keep and bear arms.

From your lips to SCOTUS' ears.

[TomKoz]

It’s Thursday !! Are we there yet?

[THE KING]

It’s Thursday !! Are we there yet?

And I thought I was anxious for the opinion.

[Davey]

Its Thursday

 

[Soutsidr]

If it's good news, they'll drop it right before JBs presser so the news gets buried by the virus death count.

[PewPewBangBang]

Not sure if you guys read the “caution on court opinions” but just so it’s out there, whether we get back good news or bad news, the opinion isn’t official until 21 days after being posted. Whoever loses is allowed to ask for a rehearing during that time.

Edited April 2, 2020 at 01:39 PM by PewPewBangBang

[Molly B.]

https://courts.illinois.gov/Opinions/SupremeCourt/2020/124100.pdf

 

posted - reading now -

[Molly B.]

35 CONCLUSION ¶ 36 The circuit court’s ruling that section 2(a)(1) of the FOID Card Act is unconstitutional as applied was not necessary to the resolution of this case. Therefore, we remand this cause to the circuit court. We direct that the order entered by the circuit court on February 14, 2018, be vacated. We further direct that the October 16, 2018, judgment order dismissing defendant’s information be vacated and then modified to exclude the ruling that section 2(a)(1) is unconstitutional. The - 13 -modified order is thereupon to be reentered. ¶

 

37 Vacated and remanded with directions.

 

[Molly B.]

JUSTICE KARMEIER, dissenting: ¶ 39 The majority’s decision resolves this appeal based on an issue no one has raised, decides the issue through misapplication of principles we have no reason to discuss, and remands the case to the circuit court for entry of an order that is clearly meritless and serves no purpose. Neither the parties nor the interests of justice will be served by this unexpected and pointless exercise. I therefore respectfully dissent.

 

[Molly B.]

Looks like the court punted and sent it back to circuit court.