Upholder

Almost. The 5th Circuit ruled that the law was facially unconstitutional and directed the district court to enter a judgement to that effect. The district court is claiming that they no longer have the authority for a broader permanent injunction. The district court is conflating SCOTUS rulings about universal temporary and preliminary injunctions with their authority as it relates to permanent injunctions. As Euler said, the district judge that was overruled is being pissy and is (IMHO) likely to get a spanking by the 5th circuit.

One difference between the first NYSRPA case and this one is that the case concerned a NYC restriction and the NY State legislature made re-implementing that restriction a violation of state law. In this instance, the legislature passed this original law and if it repealed it in an effort to moot the case, they could very easily simply pass it again once the case was dismissed. That may be seen as a significant enough difference to keep the case alive as there is precedent for doing so when the court believes the system is being "gamed".

Predicting the actions of the court is a fool's errand, but a ruling in the case could be very narrow and only discuss vampire laws (default that you cannot carry unless invited, hence the name) or it could be broader and put down a framework for rulings about sensitive places. A framework for sensitive places could be very useful in Illinois because we have so many places that are prohibited. They could also decide that they want to be more forceful about the Heller methodology and what burdens are on which party at which step (which is already pretty clear, but the courts are "confused" about things).

Discussion of the bill

You can voluntarily participate in the program and be paid some amount of money for your firearm... or you can choose not to participate and get nothing when they come and take it by force. (not purple)

They've expanded from ""assault weapons"" to "Long guns"

I heard him say that and thought he was being very optimistic. I fully expect it to be at least July, 2026 before the 7th Circuit provides a ruling. The 7th Circuit didn't even schedule the hearing we just had for more than 6 months. They cannot win in the end. All they can do is stall and delay. They're not stupid; they know this as well as you and I.

Heller said "traditionally lawful purposes" more than a decade ago:

The general consensus is that this is the case they have telegraphed that they are waiting for. We will likely get the opportunity to find out if that is accurate.

Easterbrook admitted that the position that Assistant US Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon advocates is the test that Justice Thomas set forth. He's gonna rule otherwise anyway.

Audio stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rjlGZ9oHk Live tweeting from SAF (Kostas Moros): https://x.com/2AFDN/status/1970200548134789474

Yes, the hearing is at 2pm Central on Monday. Typically, the audio is available on Youtube, IIRC.

Google AI is not particularly good. Here's one you can try yourself which is completely incorrect: