339 replies to this topic

[Tvandermyde]

today a motion for an injunction against the enforcement of the UUW and AgUUW statutes was filed in the case of Shepard v. Madigan

release to follow.

attached is the motion

Attached Files

•  PI_Memorandum_-_FINAL1.pdf   87.12K   1149 downloads

[sirflyguy]

Everyone at this forum needs to read this!

[ilphil]

Interesting read.
It will be fun to see the state's response.  

[Tvandermyde]

Today the defendants asked for an extention to file their response till the 22nd. This is the second request. But that was before they knew we were filing the motion.

[snubjob]

This is awesome!!!

[mauserme]

I like the fact that this makes such a different argument from Moore while arriving at the same conclusion.

[abolt243]

snubjob, on 08 July 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

This is awesome!!!

The last 72 hours have been awesome for gun rights in IL!!  

AB

[snubjob]

abolt243, on 08 July 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

snubjob, on 08 July 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

This is awesome!!!

The last 72 hours have been awesome for gun rights in IL!!  

AB

Yes they have! I've been in a bad mood for several weeks, but this kind of news makes this old grouch want to take the wife out for supper and celebrate. There just might be a light at the end of the tunnel afterall!

[willxjcherokee]

snubjob, on 08 July 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

abolt243, on 08 July 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

snubjob, on 08 July 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

This is awesome!!!

The last 72 hours have been awesome for gun rights in IL!!  

AB

Yes they have! I've been in a bad mood for several weeks, but this kind of news makes this old grouch want to take the wife out for supper and celebrate. There just might be a light at the end of the tunnel afterall!

I know what you mean! This is awesome!
The argument in this injunction is really thought out

[kurt555gs]

Now, if the NRA would file for a preliminary injunction in their case, the Chicago machine will be going bonkers. Lisa Madigan will be getting phone calls at all hours of the night. Anita Alverez might even come home from Hawaii. This is now becoming fun.

[Tvandermyde]

We did on this one, what case are you talking about?

[sirflyguy]

Who is David Livesay, and what is his connection to all of this?  I saw his name on the last page.  I went to school with his attorney and some of the attorney's siblings.  Actually also went on a canoe & camping trip to Canada once with them.

[sirflyguy]

I just read again the whole memorandum.  If you all want a succinct but still detailed history of what has brought us to this place, please read the memorandum.  It is quite an educational document, showing both the history of our pre-existing right to carry, as well as the history of carry restrictions and bans (which they beautifully reveal as having racist roots), and then tying it all together near the end by showing that Chicago's ban is more severe than the one struck down in Heller.  Also beautifully done is the description of Mary Shepard's struggles and her need AND right to carry a gun for self-protection (which is the root of the memorandum for the injunction).   Well done!

[Danielm60660]

Great read. How long does a ruling like this take to come down?

[frankw438]

While the memo in the SAF suit was a little more elegant and emotionally moving, this memo supporting the NRA/ISRA's motion is probably more likely to influence a judge's thought process. Very well thought-out arguments with very thorough documentation. I loved that they used the CDC's research to support the Right-to-Carry!

Great job!

-- Frank

[Steve O]

So Id think if we win this one the FOID card would be all we need to carry until they scramble to pass some kind of carry law????

[Tvandermyde]

if a Judge scrapped the UUW statute, they most likely woul dissue a stay to give the legislature a chance to act, that just tossing the hwole thing out the window with no ability for SAs to charge nar-do-wells with a violation, will not work.

It's just not practical. But the Oh **** factor to the SAs and miz Alverez would be a sight to see as anyone not a felon, or prohibted by class under state and federal law would have to have their case continued until the legislature sorted out what the end game was.

BTW, I hate to say it, but under Ezell, it looks that the FOID card is constitutional.

[Steve O]

The FOID card is an unnecessary waste of resources in a state like Illinois that's broke...

[bob]

Steve O, on 09 July 2011 - 10:21 AM, said:

The FOID card is an unnecessary waste of resources in a state like Illinois that's broke...

Agreed but that does not make it unconstitutional. I am more offended by the waiting period. It seems more easily challenged than the FOID card, especially given the long delay before one can even get a FOID card. What useful purpose can possibly be served by making someone wait 3 extra days to acquire a handgun after the state makes you wait an indeterminate amount of time first that has historically been anywhere from 2 weeks to as long as 6 months?

[junglebob]

Is David Livesay a plaintiff in the case?  I see his attorney listed at the bottom of the paper.

[FAL]

It's a good read. I think the state's reaction will be to dig the hole deeper, as Todd alluded to. This state has no shortage of stupidity at the highest levels.

After reading the filing, I think it's worth noting the various state's experiences... Most states are moving to a less restrictive form of carry, and none are trying to do away with their CCW laws. That alone speaks volumes to the effectiveness of CCW, and the overall "public interest" argument that Illinois will have to defend, if it wants to keep its CCW ban in place.

[bob]

FAL, on 10 July 2011 - 08:30 PM, said:

Most states are moving to a less restrictive form of carry, and none are trying to do away with their CCW laws. That alone speaks volumes to the effectiveness of CCW, and the overall "public interest" argument that Illinois will have to defend, if it wants to keep its CCW ban in place.

I don't know about the level of effectiveness, or what you mean by that, but there is a very solid bloc of voters that wants improvement in the carry laws (at least as they see it) and it is very hard for the politicians to go against that.

Given that the rivers of blood argument turned out to be a bust for them, the only legitimate argument the antis had against carry has long since gone away.

This is the US of A. Voters expect to be able to do as we please without government interference in our lives. We often want government to interfere in other people's lives, but not our own.

[Davey]

Read the whole thing earlier this morning.  I'm really curious as to what the state will come up with in it's response documents, whatever those are called.  To whomever, please post them when you can.

Also these current cases and lawsuits have me really excited.

[BShawn]

Anyone know the date this will be called (heard in front of the judge)?

[Tvandermyde]

the court's electronic notice that the Defendants will have until 7/22/11 to file their Answer or other response.  Please also note that the Court has stated no further extensions will be allowed absent extraordinary circumstances.

We are still attempting to find out if we have an expedited hearing date, etc., on the Motion for PI.  We will keep you posted as soon as we find out.

[lockman]

Tvandermyde, on 09 July 2011 - 10:15 AM, said:

if a Judge scrapped the UUW statute, they most likely woul dissue a stay to give the legislature a chance to act, that just tossing the hwole thing out the window with no ability for SAs to charge nar-do-wells with a violation, will not work.

It's just not practical. But the Oh **** factor to the SAs and miz Alverez would be a sight to see as anyone not a felon, or prohibted by class under state and federal law would have to have their case continued until the legislature sorted out what the end game was.

BTW, I hate to say it, but under Ezell, it looks that the FOID card is constitutional.

Of course us common folk realize that even if they strike it down and the legislature does not have time to act before us common folk start packin'; murder will still be murder, and all the other felonies will still be felonies, except the ones making the exercise of your fundamental right felonious.

[stm]

Tvandermyde, on 11 July 2011 - 09:00 PM, said:

the court's electronic notice that the Defendants will have until 7/22/11 to file their Answer or other response.  Please also note that the Court has stated no further extensions will be allowed absent extraordinary circumstances.

We are still attempting to find out if we have an expedited hearing date, etc., on the Motion for PI.  We will keep you posted as soon as we find out.

Looking at the long game, if Illinois drags its feet and UUW/AUUW is found to be unconstitutional, couldn't people convicted of UUW/AUUW have their convictions vacated or overturned? Assuming it was a law-abiding FOID holder who didn't have any other legal complications? That alone should motivate the ILGA to move swiftly before that a ruling on constitutionality is issued.

[CraigC]

Quote

As for the City's concern about a “regulatory vacuum” between the issuance of the preliminary injunction and the promulgation of firing‐range zoning and safety reg‐ ulations, we note that it faced a similar dilemma after the Supreme Court decided McDonald. The sky did not fall.  

It might be wishful thinking but to me it sounds like the 7th would be against a stay that continued irreparable harm.

[Smittyp83]

This is great!  It also reminded me to renew my ISRA membership!

[Tvandermyde]

there is no way the Court if going to go from no carry at all to vermont with the stroke of a pen. just not going to happen.

Even in Ezell the remanded back to the lower court for further proceedings.