Jump to content


Photo

Madiganís office seeks dismissal of teenís suit over FOID Card Act


This topic has been archived.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

#151 Mr. Fife

    Nip it

  • Members
  • 3,678 posts
  • Joined: 03-July 10

Posted 17 April 2015 - 08:23 PM

Thanks for keeping track of this.
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?
 
 

#152 Hap

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,778 posts
  • Joined: 16-May 13

Posted 17 April 2015 - 08:43 PM

Here's the oral argument:

 

 

The judges are Posner, Williams, and Andrea Wood.


Edited by Hap, 17 April 2015 - 08:45 PM.

Ad utrumque paratus


#153 firepiper

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 839 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 09

Posted 17 April 2015 - 09:16 PM

Amazing how someone who has gone through law school fails to grasp the legal concept of the age of majority......

The lawyer for the state in his testimony refers to minors under 21....yet IL considers 18y/o's adults.......



#154 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 8,540 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 17 April 2015 - 11:08 PM

How long does CA7 usually take?

#155 kwc

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,354 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 18 April 2015 - 06:24 AM

How long does CA7 usually take?


Based on the plaintiff's age when the case was first filed, she will turn 21 in a few months--by end of calendar year, perhaps? Let's hope for a ruling before then!
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#156 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 8,540 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 18 April 2015 - 10:41 AM

I don't know what to think of it after listening to the orals. I know it really doesn't mean anything but it is kind of discouraging. I think it may well hinge on whether the state can convince the court that there is a process (there isn't) to get a FOID. I'm not really worried about the age of majority issue, as I believe the court will find 18 = adulthood.



#157 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 8,540 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 18 April 2015 - 10:42 AM

BTW, thanks to Hap for linking the audio.



#158 kwc

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,354 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 18 April 2015 - 11:34 AM

Am I understanding correctly that (1) the plaintiff couldn't appeal since the application was returned as incomplete, rather than denied, and (2) there is no defined appeal process anyway? The FOID Act, Section 10(a), states "the aggrieved party may appeal to the Director of State Police for a hearing upon such denial, revocation or seizure..."
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#159 junglebob

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 5,943 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 04

Posted 18 April 2015 - 12:03 PM

I think this holds no water at all, considering someone at 18 can be in the military and handle explosives, fully automatic weapons, weaponized drones, etc. The right to self defense honestly should not have an age limit, but I know how the legal world works...

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2


The minimum age to possess a firearm in Vermont is 16, and this is without parental consent. Minimum age to carry is also 16. In Alaska the minimum age to possess is also 16.

Disarming the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave them. George Mason

Though defensive violence will always be a sad necessity in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrong doers should dominate just men.  -  Augustine

Three school masacres have been stopped by civilians with firearms. Two with handguns and the third by a guy with a shotgun. (Pearl, Ms; Appalacian School of Law; Edinboro,Pa)


#160 RonOglesby - Now in Texas

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,293 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 12

Posted 18 April 2015 - 01:46 PM

Hearing the word "MINOR" repeated over and over drove me nuts. No one calls 18 Years old a "minor". Then again this parental approval isnt just for 18 year olds. its for 20 year olds also. I have never heard a 20 year old considered or called a "minor". this is the only context.

 

I knew a guy that did a 2 year AD stint in the navy (maybe three, not sure) it was a reservist program where you did 2 or 3 years on AD, then a few years reserve (once a month). He was back in Chicago at 20 years old. Had a job, his own apartment, was a vet, and his parents didnt even live in Illinois anymore. They are saying THAT GUY would need to get mommy's signature. But the judges here keep swinging back to "12 and 14 year olds" or the word "minors" and brains not fully developed until you are in the 20's. I love it. They can really sit there and say "the government decided 18 is legal to be an adult, for contracts, joining the military, buying land, getting married... but you are a MINOR for firearms, like a 12 year old"


Contrary to popular opinion, no one owes you anything.

#161 kwc

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,354 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 18 April 2015 - 02:07 PM

[purple] Don't forget the Affordable Care Act extends the definition of "child" to the age of 26. [/purple]
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#162 Hap

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,778 posts
  • Joined: 16-May 13

Posted 18 April 2015 - 02:31 PM

BTW, thanks to Hap for linking the audio.

 

You're welcome.

 

While we're at it, here are some more links which people may want to include in their bookmarks:

 

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: https://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/

CA7 oral arguments search by case # or past day/week/month: http://media.ca7.usc...guments/oar.jsp

CA7 opinion search by case # or date: http://media.ca7.usc...ov/opinion.html

 

For the real masochists out there, CA7 also has an RSS feed for its opinions; details on the web site.


Edited by Hap, 18 April 2015 - 02:32 PM.

Ad utrumque paratus


#163 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 19 April 2015 - 09:59 AM

Am I understanding correctly that (1) the plaintiff couldn't appeal since the application was returned as incomplete, rather than denied, and (2) there is no defined appeal process anyway?

The FOID Act, Section 10(a), states "the aggrieved party may appeal to the Director of State Police for a hearing upon such denial, revocation or seizure..."

Correct according to my knowledge, appealing is impossible. They have no real mechanism set up to handle denials based on age. That's what I've been told by a legislative aide who deals with the FOID Division on a daily basis. Told me ISP who work there don't like it but their hands are tied. If they really are willing to entertain an appeal based on age, then the process must be drawn out to the point where it moots the entire purpose of said appeal.

We all know the second she turns 21, the state will file a motion to dismiss the appeal as moot, technically she won't have standing when she turns 21. Doubt that CA7 will play ball with that but Williams and Wood are both Clinton appointees and voted to rehear Moore en banc. Posner may be on the panel but he's a wild card at best when it comes to the Second Amendment.
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#164 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,091 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 19 April 2015 - 12:20 PM

Hearing the word "MINOR" repeated over and over drove me nuts. No one calls 18 Years old a "minor". Then again this parental approval isnt just for 18 year olds. its for 20 year olds also. I have never heard a 20 year old considered or called a "minor". this is the only context.

 

I knew a guy that did a 2 year AD stint in the navy (maybe three, not sure) it was a reservist program where you did 2 or 3 years on AD, then a few years reserve (once a month). He was back in Chicago at 20 years old. Had a job, his own apartment, was a vet, and his parents didnt even live in Illinois anymore. They are saying THAT GUY would need to get mommy's signature. But the judges here keep swinging back to "12 and 14 year olds" or the word "minors" and brains not fully developed until you are in the 20's. I love it. They can really sit there and say "the government decided 18 is legal to be an adult, for contracts, joining the military, buying land, getting married... but you are a MINOR for firearms, like a 12 year old"

 

That's the point, they want to enforce the law on the older ones, than the younger ones.   The law, makes sense for 12-14 year olds, but is ridiculous for 18+.  They want to say "it makes sense for 12-14" but don't want to deal with the fact that the law is ridiculous for 18+, because if they did, the law is dead for 18+.   There is no rational basis.  Not constitutional.

 

If you take a look at other laws, you'll see a similar pattern.   Sane laws go insane if you go to the extreme areas of what was allowed, so we must cut back the law to only its sane parts, that's how the litigation goes.


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#165 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 19 April 2015 - 03:05 PM

I can't see how the panel could possibly justify allowing the state to deprive citizens in the age of majority the right to keep arms because mom or dad won't sign off and the "appeals process" is a complete joke because an 18 yr old who is denied for that reason alone will turn 21 long before the appeal is processed. If you're 18-20, do you need mom's signature to go to a Mosque? No. Do you need mom's signature to refuse to consent to a search of your vehicle? No. Does the federal government need mom's consent to execute you? No. To insult the President? Ha, no. But the state requires parental consent to keep arms...or, for that matter, a single round of ammo. It's insane, Williams and Wood seem to be ok with creating three classes of citizens. Minors, those in the age of majority but not in the age of "real majority," and those in the real age of majority. Two "ages of majority" created here. Is it 18, or is it 21? You can't have both. Parental consent is not, nor will it ever be required to exercise any other protected right. That's what makes the requirement insane. This whole "oh, well applicants can appeal" (never mind that it takes half a decade or more for the appeal to go through the pipeline) is how they've managed to keep the FOID Card Act on the books. Delays in processing, well if there's a suit filed you can bet the FSB will moot the case by issuing the FOID. Oh, you're 18 and have no parents because they're dead and you're a veteran...Army...Ranger? We thank you for your service, your application has been denied. You may appeal to the Director....and your appeal will be processed when you turn 23, but hey there's an administrative remedy so you can't file a civil rights action (according to Chief Judge Wood, repeatedly stated that since she had not exhausted all administrative remedies available, a 1983 action cannot be filed).
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#166 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 8,540 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 19 April 2015 - 07:41 PM

It's aggravating to listen to, but I just don't see how they could ignore the age of majority in an opinion, given the far reaching implications of stating that an enumerated right can subject to parental consent. The plaintiff's counsel was very wise to draw the parallel to the age of consent for an abortion. 



#167 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 20 April 2015 - 09:08 AM

The fact that he tied this case to a PP case is good, but he didn't do his homework to find out that ISP doesn't process appeals. At least not in a timely manner so the administrative remedy is window dressing. That fact, right there, is enough to dump the parental consent requirement.
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#168 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 8,540 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 20 April 2015 - 09:45 AM

Yes, I agree his argument could have been strengthened (maybe) by explaining that the choice to pursue the 1983 action because 1) it will be quicker and 2) there's a legitimate process for that. I'm sure the time constraints have a great impact on how well they can articulate even a few key points. That, and getting ran through the ringer. That ringer goes both ways though. The other guy's argument was pretty well written off as nonsense there at the end.

#169 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,709 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 20 April 2015 - 12:33 PM

Even if plaintiff turns 21 nothing will change the fact that the plaintiff was denied the right to own for 3 years due to the 21 or older age requirement. A right delayed is still a right denied and in my opinion the plaintiff should be entitled to damages and fees and court costs.
The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui

#170 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,091 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 20 April 2015 - 05:28 PM

 Parental consent is not, nor will it ever be required to exercise any other protected right.

 

Unfortunately, there is one other protected right that requires parental consent.    Life.    If momma don't want you alive, game over. 

So the fact that we have that reasoning carry over into the 2A here in IL doesn't surprise me, that's how the left operates.   Once they successfully deny human rights to one group of people, they seek to expand that to deny human rights to the next group of people. 


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#171 brianj - now in Kansas

    Political refugee from the People's Republic of IL

  • Members
  • 1,583 posts
  • Joined: 17-September 12

Posted 21 April 2015 - 12:13 PM

I suppose the next question is, will the plaintiff lose standing (and therefore require dismissal of the case), if she turns 21 before the ruling is made?

 

Bri


"Your father's 1911..  Not as random or clumsy as a Glock.  A more elegant weapon for a more civilized age." -- Obi Wan Kenobi


#172 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,709 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 21 April 2015 - 12:31 PM

I suppose the next question is, will the plaintiff lose standing (and therefore require dismissal of the case), if she turns 21 before the ruling is made?
 
Bri

She would have standing to sue for monetary damages since even if she turns 21 she was still denied her 2nd amendment rights for 3 years. It would be easy to show damages if she were victimized in her home during the time that she was under 21. If for instance $1000 worth of property was stolen from her while at home that would be $1000 worth of damages plus emotional pain and suffering plus court costs.
The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui

#173 Talonap

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,283 posts
  • Joined: 12-July 08

Posted 21 April 2015 - 01:13 PM

 

 Parental consent is not, nor will it ever be required to exercise any other protected right.

 

Unfortunately, there is one other protected right that requires parental consent.    Life.    If momma don't want you alive, game over. 

So the fact that we have that reasoning carry over into the 2A here in IL doesn't surprise me, that's how the left operates.   Once they successfully deny human rights to one group of people, they seek to expand that to deny human rights to the next group of people. 

 

 

I don't think those old laws, (Hebrew I think or Muslim - not sure), apply here in this country. You know, the one that says a parent can kill a child whenever they want...



#174 AlphaKoncepts aka CGS

    Firearm Instructor and Gun Rights Activist

  • Members
  • 8,212 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 12

Posted 22 April 2015 - 08:41 AM

What is amazing to me is that it took so long for this case to happen. What was foid back in 68/69 or something like that.

-Thomas

Member, ISRA; Life Member, NRA; NRA Certified Instructor, AGI Certified Gunsmith, Illinois Concealed Carry Instructor
www.alphakoncepts.com  www.gunrights4illinois.com  @AlphaKoncepts


#175 drumgod

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 489 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 13

Posted 22 April 2015 - 10:23 AM

Just out of curiosity... Does the ISP actually do anything to verify the signature on "under 21" applications?

 

I'm not sure how old I was when I first got my FOID (it was around 30 years ago) but I do remember having to get my mother to sign it.  I just threw it in the mail and a card came back about a month later.  I suspect I could have just scribbled something on the signature line.



#176 armadroid

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,894 posts
  • Joined: 05-October 12

Posted 22 April 2015 - 02:23 PM

How can we get the court to rule foid is unconstitutional? it clearly makes all guns contraband unless a person possesses an approved card(given by the state), does that not make all guns illegal by default?



#177 stockboyy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 155 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 14

Posted 22 April 2015 - 08:09 PM

yes by FOID-LAW ;  all Illinois citizens are prohibited persons 



#178 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 23 April 2015 - 09:22 AM

They simply will not process applications filed by those under 21 without a parental signature. My Rep's legislative aide told me that he's dealt with FSB on several occasions where they simply told him "The administrative remedy is to turn 21. We won't process the application or any appeal for applicants without parental consent." One was a veteran who'd grown up in the foster care system, parents dead, not 21, cannot get a signature, and ISP told him "nope, sorry."
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#179 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,540 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 23 April 2015 - 09:26 AM

How can we get the court to rule foid is unconstitutional? it clearly makes all guns contraband unless a person possesses an approved card(given by the state), does that not make all guns illegal by default?

Yes, it turns common sense on its head by making all citizens prohibited persons, sans FOID Card. New Jersey has FIDs, California has COEs, etc etc so at least we don't have to get new approval whenever we buy a firearm. Mosley could have eviscerated the Age but he never applied for a FOID in the first place so his 14th Amendment claim was dismissed.
NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#180 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,709 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 26 April 2015 - 11:52 AM

The deprivation of a constitutional right, even if only briefly, constitutes irreparable harm.
In fact the ruling in the case of Messmer v Harrison stated as much.
So this plaintiff in the FOID case also is suffering irreparable harm.
Here is the link to the case discussion
http://illinoiscarry...250#entry898685
The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui