Jump to content

Matt B

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Matt B

  1. Yup. This will prod the 7th into granting the en banc review but have little other impact. I suppose if the plaintiffs feel the en banc is 50/50 odds of a favorable decision then could be anyone’s game and maybe this pays off.
  2. If Scotus actually takes this case up I'm making it my mission to spread the news of how this story actually broke. If taken up it will be a huge deal and the truth absolutely will get out.
  3. The same three judge panel? Easterbrook wasn’t going to reinstate the injunction.. not sure why Bevis bothered to ask.
  4. They should be renamed “Duke Center for Preservation of Firearms Laws” as they are essentially a gun ban advocacy group masquerading as legal academia. That said, I do worry scotus will decline this case for the reasons they mention.
  5. Just came here to post this. Cert petition should start getting a lot more attention amongst the 2a community now.
  6. Yeah unless I’m mistaken this is the first opportunity for scotus to address a final judgement 2a challenge to a gun ban since Bruen. Add in the conflict of interest and I am very curious to see if this draws scotus attention
  7. Can someone smarter than me explain how this is treated when different cases within this consolidated case take different actions? Because the ISRA is taking theirs to scotus while these other plaintiffs are going en banc.
  8. I wasn’t able to listen as I’ve been at work. Why do you say she seems worried? Worried about the law actually being struck down?
  9. It is beyond disturbing that the ISP can’t provide clarification on how their troopers will enforce this law beyond referencing the statute itself which is incredibly vague.
  10. I wasn’t able to listen; was the mini 14 specifically brought up? Because that should have been a slam dunk question on whether the ranch model is banned.
  11. Yup the 9th has no shame. They will pull this into the Duncan en banc panel as a related case and shut it down.
  12. Great so now the ISP can hold meetings where again they do nothing more than regurgitate the language of the statute and provide no clarification.
  13. Yes if the law is enjoined by McGlynn, the state will immediately appeal that to the 7th who will almost certainly stay that order.
  14. I think the state wants to trumpet a high compliance rate of registration; so it is surprising they haven’t pushed out emails or snail mail to Foid holders. Maybe they are waiting for the Easterbrook decision to drop first; but either way Id be shocked if we don’t see some sort of notice provided by December.
  15. What I wonder is: assuming McGlynn strikes down part or all of the law; does this go directly to the Easterbrook panel on appeal as a related case?
  16. I imagine the 9th was faced with the choice of either 1) Letting the three judge panel take the case and potentially let the injunction take effect and open the floodgates on magazines, but delay scotus from getting the case for another year or two 2) doing this and en banc right away to head off the injunction but accept this gets to scotus a lot faster now. The first option may have been the smarter move for them but they just couldn’t accept another freedom week (months?) This is a frustrating short term setback but if this doesn’t bait scotus to start actually taking action on the shadow docket for pro 2a emergency motions, nothing will.
  17. That assessment assumes a broad reading of the barrel shroud language, as every rifle has some sort of hand guard or shroud to prevent the non firing hand from being burned by the barrel.
  18. It’s very funny that their emergency rules clarify absolutely nothing and actually cause more confusion. The language around registration only mentions assault weapons, assault weapon attachments (which are distinct from high cap magazines), and the 50 cal items; but then they bizarrely mention high cap magazines when referencing out of state folks registering items after moving into Illinois. The train wreck continues with this law.
  19. ILguns Reddit loves to argue about this. Many argue every semi auto that can accept a detachable magazine is banned because of the barrel shroud language that could conceivably cover every form of hand guard on every rifle ever. I personally believe those drafting and voting for the law were idiots who probably just intended to cover things like a Tec 9. In a potential worst case where the law is not struck down it’s going to have to get settled in a criminal case perhaps.
  20. Per the State’s own court filings, they do not consider the standard 10/22 (without pistol grip) an assault weapon. That may be contrary to text of the law but whatever.
  21. For being a single judge on a circuit court, he has had the opportunity to do an unbelievable amount of damage to second amendment rights.
  22. Called that one. The fix was in as soon as they were selected for the motions panel. On to scotus.
  23. I’m convinced now the motions panel will be hearing this case and that Easterbrook and Woods are going to force us up to scotus on a loss.
  24. Todd seems more upbeat about this development than I am so I’ll temper my disappointment to some degree. Looking forward to more analysis later.
  25. The ISRA was happy with the order, which surprises me as it seems like a clear punt with the intention of running out the clock on this Supreme Court. Especially when we had hoped for a favorable ruling in the 7th that could influence the gun ban cases. Yeah it’s better than an unfavorable decision but doesn’t feel like a win here. “The ISRA is pleased with today's ruling by the US 7th Circuit in Atkinson v Garland. The 7th Circuit has remanded the case back to the lower courts to be considered under the recent Bruen decision. This case challenges the ban on firearms possession by persons convicted of a non violent felony who pose no danger to society. The plaintiff has a 25 year old mail fraud conviction, and had clearly paid his debt to society. The court ruled that historical context might exist for rehabilitated citizens to exercise their 2nd Amendment Rights when considered under the Bruen decision, therefore the lower courts must reconsider this case. This continues a modern pattern of analyzing restorative justice and its effect on the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens. The ISRA is proud to be a supporter of this important case, and hope it leads to more individuals having their rights restored after having paid their debts to society. “
  • Create New...