Jump to content


Photo

Moore/Shepard hearing - 7th Circuit


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2071 replies to this topic

#1 laststate2havecarry

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 11

Posted 03 June 2012 - 09:50 PM

So when do things start happening on the Shephard Moore case at the 7th Circuit level? I am unaware of where things go from here and when. Can anyone enlighten me on what is expected to happen and when?

#2 TyGuy

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,809 posts
  • Joined: 10-November 09

Posted 03 June 2012 - 10:24 PM

Friday June 8 th!
ILSP Approved CCW Instructor
NRA Endowment Member
ISRA Member
GOA Member

Buy my stuff!

My favorite post ----- Walmart Thread ----- Ammo Alert Thread ---- Daily Deals Thread

#3 Gray Peterson

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 426 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 04

Posted 03 June 2012 - 10:30 PM

A 3 Judge Panel of the 7th Circuit Court of appeals will be hearing the Shepard/Moore case this Friday. Under the PI schedule that's in the 7th Circuit, the "April 2012 sitting" of the court, the last day of that is August 8th, which is why I keep saying that date.

Then, the loser of either case has the option to appeal directly to the US Supreme Court with a cert petition. If they accept the cert, which is considered a certainty if the we lose (and less so if the state loses and cert petitions), we'll have a decision by 6/24/2013.

#4 Howard Roark

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,081 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 09

Posted 03 June 2012 - 10:44 PM

Gray, are you going to Buca Di Beppo's restaurant in Lombard, Illannoy on Friday nite? Would be nice to have you join us.
Howard Roark
Yay guns!!! boooo anti-gunners!

#5 Gray Peterson

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 426 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 04

Posted 03 June 2012 - 11:28 PM

Gray, are you going to Buca Di Beppo's restaurant in Lombard, Illannoy on Friday nite? Would be nice to have you join us.


'fraid not. I live in Seattle metro area so I can't attend. If I had Friday off, I would have flown out to Chicago myself.

#6 Chiburbian

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 756 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 08

Posted 04 June 2012 - 04:17 AM

To save me the trouble of looking it up, can someone tell me where the oral arguments will be held and what time? Is the public allowed to attend? To me it is worth taking a day off of work to experience.

Edited by Chiburbian, 04 June 2012 - 04:18 AM.


#7 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 04 June 2012 - 05:50 AM

There are two good scenarios that I see.

1. We lose, we appeal, and SCOTUS takes the case.

2. We win, the state appeals, and SCOTUS takes the case.

Worst case. We win, but only on open carry and the state does not appeal. If I were the other side and we were to win only on OC, I might well accept that and than continue to block LTC, just out of spite if nothing else. We would still not be legally able to carry in a car, or any public space. And there is no guarantee that whatever limited OC movement might come about would change the dynamic much.

The more I think about it the more I think that this is a likely situation. SCOTUS has been fairly clear that concealed carry has a lower degree of protection (if any) than does OC.

I still think a few years down the road after a decision that we get LTC anyway, just from momentum if nothing else.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#8 Tvandermyde

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 04 June 2012 - 07:28 AM

Bob -- this is thebestand fastest case that could go to SCOTUS. However, we could win the appeal, I think they will punt and not give us a direct win. They could then remand the case to the lower cour like Ezell and we get bogged down in the district court.
While a 9 mm or .40 caliber bullet may or may not expand, it is an undeniable fact that a .45 caliber bullet will never shrink.

#9 output

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 633 posts
  • Joined: 09-March 11

Posted 04 June 2012 - 07:33 AM

They could then remand the case to the lower cour like Ezell and we get bogged down in the district court.


I hope that doesn't happen. :frantics:

Edited by output, 04 June 2012 - 07:33 AM.

“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles. - Jeff Cooper, Art of the Rifle

#10 Danielm60660

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,301 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 11

Posted 04 June 2012 - 07:42 AM

Todd, what would we consider a punt? How much of a non-decision decision could they make out of the very simple question we are asking?
DM

#11 Tvandermyde

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,664 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 04 June 2012 - 08:25 AM

Something akin to we don't have enough guidance on the issue and if the Supremes say the right goes beyond the home then they need to say so more clearly. Somehting akin to the 4th district ruling.
While a 9 mm or .40 caliber bullet may or may not expand, it is an undeniable fact that a .45 caliber bullet will never shrink.

#12 skottieusa

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 07

Posted 04 June 2012 - 08:56 AM

Exactly what I expect since both lower courts said this. They complained the supreme court wasn't specific enough or at least plain enough in its language in Heller. Good, SCOTUS will be very clear this time on this very specific issue (2nd amendment extends past your doorstep just like speech, religion, pursuit of happiness, etc) and everyone in the U.S. will benefit. Just like Heller and McDonald. The ban ends in a year or less!!

#13 Davey

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,147 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 10

Posted 04 June 2012 - 10:06 AM

Exactly what I expect since both lower courts said this. They complained the supreme court wasn't specific enough or at least plain enough in its language in Heller. Good, SCOTUS will be very clear this time on this very specific issue (2nd amendment extends past your doorstep just like speech, religion, pursuit of happiness, etc) and everyone in the U.S. will benefit. Just like Heller and McDonald. The ban ends in a year or less!!


This scenario is why it's important we get Obama the heck out of the oval office. He will nominate another Sotomayor or Kagan.

Edited by Davey, 04 June 2012 - 10:08 AM.


#14 mstrat

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,395 posts
  • Joined: 27-September 10

Posted 04 June 2012 - 10:11 AM

Is there a possibility that this will be remanded without an order for injunction?
i.e. Can the 7th send it back down and set us back a few more years by requiring another trial or whatever (similar to what happened in Wilson) ?

On a side-note, how can these courts cop out with regard to ruling on the constitutionality of legislation? It's cowardly.
"Big daddy SCOTUS didn't tell us the answer, so we don't know." Pathetic. The defense of our liberties in this country on nearly every front has faltered, and nearly collapse. We're a nation of cowards.
ProtectIllinois.org: Share this link to teach others about RTC in IL

#15 xbaltzx

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 306 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 08

Posted 04 June 2012 - 10:42 AM

To save me the trouble of looking it up, can someone tell me where the oral arguments will be held and what time? Is the public allowed to attend? To me it is worth taking a day off of work to experience.


I would like to attend the arguments: What time on Friday? Same building as the McDonald orals?

#16 Buzzard

    Member

  • Members
  • 9,106 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 07

Posted 04 June 2012 - 11:04 AM

A 3 Judge Panel of the 7th Circuit Court of appeals will be hearing the Shepard/Moore case this Friday. Under the PI schedule that's in the 7th Circuit, the "April 2012 sitting" of the court, the last day of that is August 8th, which is why I keep saying that date. Then, the loser of either case has the option to appeal directly to the US Supreme Court with a cert petition. If they accept the cert, which is considered a certainty if the we lose (and less so if the state loses and cert petitions), we'll have a decision by 6/24/2013.


Thank you Gray, for one of the clearest explanations of the possible series of events we could expect, that I have read thus far. It would then seem, that if Obama does win re-election, that there wouldn't be enough time for a newly seated SCOTUS justice to be hearing the case. Do you agree?

#17 GarandFan

    Member

  • Members
  • 11,771 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 07

Posted 04 June 2012 - 03:37 PM

So when do things start happening on the Shephard Moore case at the 7th Circuit level? I am unaware of where things go from here and when. Can anyone enlighten me on what is expected to happen and when?


If anyone is interested in a "one thread stop" for this issue ... please see here: http://illinoiscarry...60
"It takes all the running you can do just to keep in the same place."
Lewis Carroll, 1872

#18 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 04 June 2012 - 04:10 PM

Bob -- this is thebestand fastest case that could go to SCOTUS. However, we could win the appeal, I think they will punt and not give us a direct win. They could then remand the case to the lower cour like Ezell and we get bogged down in the district court.

I don't disagree with you on any of that.

Predicting what any court will do with a hot button type issue like this is fraught with great uncertainty. No one knows until there is a ruling. And even then there is no certainty as to what the ruling means in any practical way.

I only mentioned what I thought were the two best things that could happen and the worst. Getting sent back is somewhere between best and worst as far as I am concerned.

People seem to forget what actually happened to date in DC after Heller and in Chicago after McDonald. While things improved in a limited way, there are still 5 or 10 court cases to go before they are really settled. It is still restricted enough in both places that very few people can afford the time and expense to go through the roadblocks deliberately put up by those cities.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#19 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 04 June 2012 - 04:15 PM

Exactly what I expect since both lower courts said this. They complained the supreme court wasn't specific enough or at least plain enough in its language in Heller. Good, SCOTUS will be very clear this time on this very specific issue (2nd amendment extends past your doorstep just like speech, religion, pursuit of happiness, etc) and everyone in the U.S. will benefit. Just like Heller and McDonald. The ban ends in a year or less!!


I would like to think so as well. but, what makes you think there will be 5 votes on the current SCOTUS to make that happen? It is pretty obvious to us what way they should rule, but may not be so obvious to them. I could see a 5/4 split against us this time. I would not like it, but it is not outside the realm of reasonably possible things that could happen.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#20 Ranger

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 835 posts
  • Joined: 22-February 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 07:51 AM

Obama - election: Yes. This next presidential election is critical for SCOTUS and our second amendment rights.

5-4 split. Yes. I don't think we can assume it would go our way. I would hope it would based upon Heller and McDonald; but I worry that the outcome isn't assurred otherwise those rulings might have been stronger.

#21 kurt555gs

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,018 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 09

Posted 07 June 2012 - 09:14 AM

I think our opponents are hoping we don't catch on to the newest attack that the Second Amendment can be limited to "inside the home". I do not think this was a fluke, but a carefully laid out strategy. Why not? The first and forth amendments have mostly been limited there. Why not the Second. I think this tactic comes from "on high" and has been passed down to the Federal judiciary throughout.
Kurt on G+

#22 Drylok

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,722 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 08

Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:21 AM

I think our opponents are hoping we don't catch on to the newest attack that the Second Amendment can be limited to "inside the home". I do not think this was a fluke, but a carefully laid out strategy. Why not? The first and forth amendments have mostly been limited there. Why not the Second. I think this tactic comes from "on high" and has been passed down to the Federal judiciary throughout.

The 3rd and 4th are limited to the home because the word home is actually in the amendment whereas in the 2nd it does not appear thus it is not limited to it.
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks"
-Thomas Jefferson-

Now two flags fly above my land that really sum up how I feel. One is the colors that fly high and proud the red, the white, the blue. The other ones got a rattle snake with a simple statement made, don't tread on me, is what it says and I'll take that to my grave
-Aaron Lewis-

#23 lee n. field

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,895 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 04

Posted 07 June 2012 - 11:42 AM

Worst case. We win, but only on open carry and the state does not appeal. If I were the other side and we were to win only on OC, I might well accept that and than continue to block LTC, just out of spite if nothing else. We would still not be legally able to carry in a car, or any public space. And there is no guarantee that whatever limited OC movement might come about would change the dynamic much.

The more I think about it the more I think that this is a likely situation. SCOTUS has been fairly clear that concealed carry has a lower degree of protection (if any) than does OC.


That's OK. That's what happened in Ohio and Wisconsin. Open carry is decreed OK, and people actually start to open carry. Teh Panics!, and suddenly concealed doesn't seem so bad.
"Woe to you who desire the day of the LORD!
Why would you have the day of the LORD?
It is darkness, and not light,"

#24 C0untZer0

    Contributing Member in Arrears

  • Members
  • 12,250 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 07 June 2012 - 01:16 PM

Woo Hoo !!!

I can't wait until tomorrow!

This is almost as exiting as waiting for SHOTshow 2012...
Mayor Bloomberg himself has recently turned his attention from oversize soft drinks to gun control, confirming the tendency of the Progressive to go from nanny to tyrant.
- N. A. Halkides -
 

 


#25 Chiburbian

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 756 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 08

Posted 08 June 2012 - 06:10 AM

On the train now. Anyplace nearby you all want to meet for breakfast?

#26 Xwing

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,571 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 09

Posted 08 June 2012 - 06:23 AM

I just don't see an Illinois-based court ruling in our favor. But have high hopes for the appeal... Hopefully Obama won't have the opportunity to remake the court before it is heard.

NRA Lifetime Member
IGOLD 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016
CCW Laws: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Posted anti-gun business listing: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Gun Range Tools & Logs: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Illinois Government: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)


#27 GarandFan

    Member

  • Members
  • 11,771 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 07

Posted 08 June 2012 - 06:32 AM

I just don't see an Illinois-based court ruling in our favor.


You don't see it because the case hasn't even been argued yet! :whistle: Today sometime after 0900!
"It takes all the running you can do just to keep in the same place."
Lewis Carroll, 1872

#28 Chiburbian

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 756 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 08

Posted 08 June 2012 - 06:33 AM

I will hang out near Ogilvie till about 0800. After that I am going to Lou Mitchels on Jackson. Just South west of Ogilvie. Good diner, fast service (usually).

South of Union and Ogilvie to Jackson. Head West. (right)

219 S Dearborn

If there are any other preferences let me know.

Edit: Due to abolts comment, heading directly to court building.

Edited by Chiburbian, 08 June 2012 - 06:47 AM.


#29 GarandFan

    Member

  • Members
  • 11,771 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 07

Posted 08 June 2012 - 06:39 AM

Does anyone know whether BOTH Alan Gura (Moore) and Charles Cooper (Shepard) will present arguments? I kind of expect that, because they each filed briefs.

Remember Shepard was a case supported by NRA and ISRA. Moore was a case supported by SAF and Illinois Carry. And from reading both of "our" briefs ... it seems clear they were working together on this!
"It takes all the running you can do just to keep in the same place."
Lewis Carroll, 1872

#30 abolt243

    Tim Bowyer

  • Moderator
  • 11,669 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 08 June 2012 - 06:43 AM

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.

We want to put our best foot forward as gun owners/second amendment supporters. As soon as possible and proper, please let those of us stuck in our normal daytime activities know what the heck is going on!!

AB
Are you a member of the ISRA?? If not, why not?? Join over 18,000 other Illinois gun owners in the fight for your rights!!!

The Roman Empire fell due to a large, corrupt government, overspending, an overextended military, insecure borders, and the illegal immigration of Goths, barbarians (anyone who was not educated), and religious fanatics. Sound familiar?


"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams

Luke 11:21 - "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed." NASB