05FLHT Posted August 10, 2011 at 02:32 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 02:32 PM Are the insiders getting any hint if we're going to get a decision from her this week? I'm on pins and needles myself. Things are moving at the speed of light now...it's a really nice change! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylok Posted August 10, 2011 at 03:31 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 03:31 PM http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww204/bowyerscot/TapFingers.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted August 10, 2011 at 03:39 PM Author Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 03:39 PM Hatchet, love the fingers!! I need something like that to keep the email function refreshed on my phone! Checking it for text and emails every 5 seconds keeps using the battery up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey Posted August 10, 2011 at 03:46 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 03:46 PM Suspense is about as bad as getting ready for a first date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadInjun Posted August 10, 2011 at 04:28 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 04:28 PM I joined this forum specifically to follow this thread. I think I've landed among friends, though. I'll keep a close eye out and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylok Posted August 10, 2011 at 04:43 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 04:43 PM I joined this forum specifically to follow this thread. I think I've landed among friends, though. I'll keep a close eye out and see what happens. You bet ya, thanks for joining us. Where abouts do ya hail from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted August 10, 2011 at 05:40 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 05:40 PM Welcome! Your SN makes me want to read some good ol' Mark Twain again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milhouse86 Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:09 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:09 PM Are we expecting anything new today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:18 PM Author Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:18 PM We could hear from the judge any day now but we have no indication of when that will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:36 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:36 PM As someone else posted the link you can wear out your F5 key along with me if you wish: http://www.ilcd.uscourts.gov/ordersopinions.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Getzapped Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:52 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 08:52 PM I hate suspense!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stm Posted August 10, 2011 at 09:47 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 09:47 PM I hope this doesn't turn into another indefinite wait like Palmer v. D.C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt-45 Posted August 10, 2011 at 09:55 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 09:55 PM I hope this doesn't turn into another indefinite wait like Palmer v. D.C. it looks that way, don't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abolt243 Posted August 10, 2011 at 10:23 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 10:23 PM I hope this doesn't turn into another indefinite wait like Palmer v. D.C. it looks that way, don't it. Just will be a week tomorrow since the hearing. Chill out, judges are not known for speed. AB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talonap Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:01 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:01 PM The fact that the judge is thinking things out, could be a good sign for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylok Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:39 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:39 PM The fact that the judge is thinking things out, could be a good sign for us. And the fact that she was appointed by the president, backed by Durbin and yet is a gun owner and transports her firearm in her car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Gwinn Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:39 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:39 PM It could also mean she's making her denial as bulletproof as she can . . . but I admit, it does seem like if she just wanted to spit out a denial, she could have done it by Monday or Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abolt243 Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:42 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:42 PM It could also mean she's making her denial as bulletproof as she can . . . but I admit, it does seem like if she just wanted to spit out a denial, she could have done it by Monday or Tuesday. Or maybe she's sitting on a beach somewhere, reading these posts, knowing that she'll be gone for another 2 weeks!!! And laughing at every word!! AB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakPPI Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:53 PM Share Posted August 10, 2011 at 11:53 PM If the Judge wanted an easy denial, she could have cut and pasted Judge Lampkin's analysis in People v. Mimes. Personally, I think the delay is a good thing. It means that we will get a well thought out opinion either, win or lose. A well thought out opinion against us gives the 7th circuit a lot of theories to reject in writing, while a well thought out decision for us gives the 7th Circuit an easier jumping off point. The wheels of justice turn very slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigC Posted August 11, 2011 at 12:20 AM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 12:20 AM How far (geographically) does a district judge's authority extend? I know that a ruling by a circuit court is binding through out the circuit, does the same hold true for a district? Would the state only be injorned from enforcement within the Central District of Illinois? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundguy Posted August 11, 2011 at 01:29 AM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 01:29 AM How far (geographically) does a district judge's authority extend? I know that a ruling by a circuit court is binding through out the circuit, does the same hold true for a district? Would the state only be injorned from enforcement within the Central District of Illinois? Good question. To start... I found this: "United States district courts--The decisions of U.S. district courts are mandatory on specialized lower courts if within the appellate jurisdiction of the district court (i.e., bankruptcy, territorial courts, etc.). District court decisions are not binding on state courts. " I am not clear on what this passage means for us. Looking forward to a discussion and some insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakPPI Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:38 AM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:38 AM How far (geographically) does a district judge's authority extend? I know that a ruling by a circuit court is binding through out the circuit, does the same hold true for a district? Would the state only be injorned from enforcement within the Central District of Illinois? Good question. To start... I found this: "United States district courts--The decisions of U.S. district courts are mandatory on specialized lower courts if within the appellate jurisdiction of the district court (i.e., bankruptcy, territorial courts, etc.). District court decisions are not binding on state courts. " I am not clear on what this passage means for us. Looking forward to a discussion and some insight. The information you quoted refers to case law citation. A US District court decision is "persuasive" but not "binding" on a State court. A 7th Circuit decision is "binding" on the lower US District Court. The US District court has jurisdiction over whatever parties are named and the subject matter of the suit. It's not a question of geography. In this case, the subject matter is the US Constitution in relation to a State law and the court has jurisdiction over the "State" through Lisa Madigan, as the "enforcer" of the law in question. If the US District court finds the law unconstitutional, it's unconstitutional PERIOD, not just in Springfield, etc. geography is irrelevant in this case. Federal Judges are crazy powerful, especially when it comes to constitutional questions of law. These are not judges hearing traffic tickets or divorce cases. These are judges that are appointed for life and hear the "real" cases that shape the legal landscape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneshot Posted August 11, 2011 at 05:02 AM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 05:02 AM The fact that the judge is thinking things out, could be a good sign for us. And the fact that she was appointed by the president, backed by Durbin and yet is a gun owner and transports her firearm in her car Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05FLHT Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:09 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:09 PM The fact that the judge is thinking things out, could be a good sign for us. And the fact that she was appointed by the president, backed by Durbin and yet is a gun owner and transports her firearm in her car The only concern I have mirrors what happened in Peruta, where the judge found that because unloaded open carry was allowed, the right was not prohibited. The judge may use this as an 'out' and punt the case, but I don't believe a negative ruling, based on 'unloaded and enclosed in a case,' would stand a chance on appeal to the 7th Circuit. Either way, this is going to be a very interesting decision to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt-45 Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:14 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:14 PM The fact that the judge is thinking things out, could be a good sign for us. And the fact that she was appointed by the president, backed by Durbin and yet is a gun owner and transports her firearm in her car The only concern I have mirrors what happened in Peruta, where the judge found that because unloaded open carry was allowed, the right was not prohibited. The judge may use this as an 'out' and punt the case, but I don't believe a negative ruling, based on 'unloaded and enclosed in a case,' would stand a chance on appeal to the 7th Circuit. Either way, this is going to be a very interesting decision to read. yea... but we only have open is when we hunt. right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05FLHT Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:21 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:21 PM The only concern I have mirrors what happened in Peruta, where the judge found that because unloaded open carry was allowed, the right was not prohibited. The judge may use this as an 'out' and punt the case, but I don't believe a negative ruling, based on 'unloaded and enclosed in a case,' would stand a chance on appeal to the 7th Circuit. Either way, this is going to be a very interesting decision to read. yea... but we only have open is when we hunt. right My concern is a parellel of the issue, not the method of carry. In Peruta, the judge ruled that 'unloaded open carry' was a sufficient enough allowance that it did not prohibit the right. The judge in Moore can rule that 'unloaded and enclosed in a case' does the same. This is my concern regarding her comment about being able to transport a firearm in IL. From the first hand accounts, it seems that our side made the distinction between 'transporting' and 'bearing a functional firearm.' I just hope the judge noted the differences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakPPI Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:25 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:25 PM What would be hilarious is if she interpreted the "militia" exception to allow open carry. This would technically be allowed if you believe the arguments in shepherds motion for summary judgment in the other federal case. The people are the militia and to disarm the militia violates the prefatory clause. Or that the statute contradicts itself, kind of hard to explain in a forum posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt-45 Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:29 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:29 PM The only concern I have mirrors what happened in Peruta, where the judge found that because unloaded open carry was allowed, the right was not prohibited. The judge may use this as an 'out' and punt the case, but I don't believe a negative ruling, based on 'unloaded and enclosed in a case,' would stand a chance on appeal to the 7th Circuit. Either way, this is going to be a very interesting decision to read. yea... but we only have open is when we hunt. right My concern is a parellel of the issue, not the method of carry. In Peruta, the judge ruled that 'unloaded open carry' was a sufficient enough allowance that it did not prohibit the right. The judge in Moore can rule that 'unloaded and enclosed in a case' does the same. This is my concern regarding her comment about being able to transport a firearm in IL. From the first hand accounts, it seems that our side made the distinction between 'transporting' and 'bearing a functional firearm.' I just hope the judge noted the differences. ok i see where you was going with it now. transporting and bearing. i think she will know, she transport's her firearm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:33 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:33 PM If the judge goes with the Peruta thing because of unloaded and enclosed in a case, they will give us so much more to argue about, like the operable part of Heller and they will have surrendered the outside the home and self defense. In some ways I wish for it. I think they are in a box and trying to figure out the best wall to punch through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakPPI Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:41 PM Share Posted August 11, 2011 at 02:41 PM I figured out a coherent way to make my militia argument in terms of ezell:The statute creates an exception for militia service, yet simultaneously disarms the militia, which defeats the purpose of the second amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.