Jump to content

Moore/Shepard hearing - 7th Circuit


Recommended Posts

Just a reminder to those attending, today's session starts at 9:00, a departure from their usual, advertised 9:30 start time. I'm not familiar with protocol or etiquette of this court, but I'm guessing it would be best to be inside the courtroom and in your seat well before court is called to order at 9:00.

 

 

Court room etiquette:

Don't be late.

Take your hat off.

No snapping bubble gum.

Turn your phone off.

NO CHEERING. ;-)

That is all.

DM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's presenting Madigan / chicago's argument? Which atty's ?

 

 

Garand I'm trying to remember about the McDonald case, I cant recall if the clerks office was efficient enough to make the argument available on line the same day of the case or not? I thought they did.

 

My recollection is that the audio was up later the same day. The opinion was out pretty much a week...many of us speculated it had been drafted prior to the oral arguments! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone please point me to a paragraph as to exactly what this case is about? A little bit of searching has left me dizzy. TIA

 

I can paraphrase ...

 

The cases (Moore and Shepard) regard the question of whether Illinois' complete ban on bearing arms is unconstitutional in light of those rights protected under the second amendment (the right to keep and bear arms). While the Heller case (DC) was about whether we have the right to keep arms, these cases (Illinois) are about whether we have the right to bear arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me see if I understand this, I am much better at understanding what is going on in the ILGA but i still struggle with courts.

 

From riffling through all the post I have concluded that:

 

1. A win for us means we will be able to carry constitutionally?!?!?! i.e. Arizona, vermont?

2. A win from us will be appealed and SCOTUS probably won't hear the appeal and therefore the ruling stands??

3. We lose, we appeal and SCOTUS will accept our appeal???

 

Please correct me, so i can understand this better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me see if I understand this, I am much better at understanding what is going on in the ILGA but i still struggle with courts.

 

From riffling through all the post I have concluded that:

 

1. A win for us means we will be able to carry constitutionally?!?!?! i.e. Arizona, vermont?

2. A win from us will be appealed and SCOTUS probably won't hear the appeal and therefore the ruling stands??

3. We lose, we appeal and SCOTUS will accept our appeal???

 

Please correct me, so i can understand this better.

 

If we win and the court grants the injunction, we'll be able to carry with an FOID card. However, IL will likely appeal and also will likely request a stay of the injunction pending that appeal. They could either appeal directly to SCOTUS or appeal to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals again 'en banc'. This means another hearing before the entire panel of judges instead of just the 3 we drew today.

 

If we lose we will appeal to SCOTUS and they may or many not hear the case.

 

There are other scenarios like we win but the case is punted back down to the District Court for another trial. This will add another year or two. This is what happened to Ezell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok WOW

 

You wont beleive the tapes when they come out.

 

Short answer is they dont seem to be buying tye ban. But. Will see.

 

The state did poorly and they have to know they have a very big problem on their hand

 

Yeah, I had a great but brief report from Colleen on her way home. She has notes and I'm sure she'll share them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. WOW

 

They were not buying the states total ban.

 

When the state said the apex of the 2A wasin the home one of the judges near the end rejected it and said no its self defense and hinted outside the home.

 

Very differnet from McDonald. They seemed to be looking for the opposite of Wollard that a may issues discreationary law would get them past the consitutional question of a ban

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colleen says the judges had good poker faces, but their questions and comments gave her a distinct warm fuzzy feeling. Williams is a woman and referenced women and teachers etc being disarmed when leaving the home and prey for attackers. Posner questioned why Chicago is so special.

 

More when Colleen gets back with her notes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...