Federal Farmer Posted October 10, 2013 at 02:27 PM Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 02:27 PM I invite those inclined to take their disagreements to PMs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domin8 Posted October 10, 2013 at 04:42 PM Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 04:42 PM Every time I see a new post on this thread, I hope it will be the decision from the 7th. Because argue all we want, that is what we all want to see.qft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted October 10, 2013 at 05:39 PM Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 05:39 PM Why do I get the feeling that the longer we wait for the results; the less we will like them?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 10, 2013 at 05:59 PM Author Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 05:59 PM Why do I get the feeling that the longer we wait for the results; the less we will like them?? Because that's how we all feel heh. We were thinking that we'd have one last Friday...ugh. If it's any consolation, the panel did hear three other cases on Thursday, as opposed to what was being heard through the grapevine. Posner released an opinion...today I wanna say and I believe he'll be drafting the Shepard opinion (unless he wants to make Flaum or Williams do it but...yeah doubtful). He hasn't released many within the past 10 days, one or two. You can subscribe to CA7's RSS feed on your phone or tablet so whenever an opinion drops, you'll get notification if you have an RSS app. I think that quite a few opinions and orders will be released by the end of the day tomorrow, hopefully including Shepard. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockerXX Posted October 10, 2013 at 07:04 PM Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 07:04 PM Go watch any Aslyum film and then come back and report. Are you confusing the high budget Abe vampire killer with the low budget Abe zombie killer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 10, 2013 at 07:13 PM Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 07:13 PM Unrelated to this case, but I see Posner released an opinion today. Does that have any indication that he still hasn't started on this opinion? Never really followed one through the whole process yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 10, 2013 at 09:04 PM Author Share Posted October 10, 2013 at 09:04 PM He could've drafted it last week for all we know and is waiting on a concurrence or dissent or both or who knows. Just because an opinion of his was released today means very little IMO. That opinion he drafted witj Rovner and Tinder was in re a case submitted (argued) in August. If we truly lost, then the panel could take its sweet time because nothing will change. Of course the opinion in McDonald (NRA) dropped five days after orals. That was ugly but it was a punt to SCOTUS because the reasoning in Easterbrook's opinion was so flawed and played cut and paste with precedent in Maloney using Cruikshank, Presser and Miller, and split with CA9 in Nordyke. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted October 16, 2013 at 06:38 PM Share Posted October 16, 2013 at 06:38 PM Still waiting!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarandFan Posted October 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM Share Posted October 16, 2013 at 11:07 PM What do you mean screwed? He have the law. Are you saying that they would basically endorse the state to take as long as they want to implement it? You have to remember ... many people are pretty much screwed all the time. They are used to it, and some even like it. They can't imagine life any other way. I have long thought that this challenge for immediate implementation was going to fall on its face (or worse). At the bottom line ... IL implemented a system for carry, and I am pretty sure Posner and the rest of the 7th will find that acceptable. Maybe we will be pleasantly surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 16, 2013 at 11:28 PM Author Share Posted October 16, 2013 at 11:28 PM The fact that it's been nearly two weeks since oral arguments and we're still waiting on an opinion could mean that the Court waited for Myerscough's opinion prior to drafting one in Shepard. It could mean Posner is gonna **** us by going on a 40 page rant. It could mean that they are just gonna keep it the way it is, no hurry in pumping out an opinion when they've got other cases to deal with. Who knows but as Greybeard stated, it's not always great when the judges ask no questions like they did with the State. That whole Posner "smack down" was just Posner being himself. My Rep's aide actually thought that the panel isn't going to issue a mandate until I corrected him. He thought the panel ruled then and there. Now it's just a game of wait and see and I'm crossing my fingers, hoping that it'll be a pleasant surprise because pessimism doesn't exactly do us any good. If we come up short then so be it, it was a Hail Mary (no pun intended) and "we" had to take the shot. The only way we could be screwed by this is if Posner goes and starts defining vague terms from the opinion in Moore. Specifically "reasonable restrictions" but the ruling is appealable so not like it's the end of the line. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 16, 2013 at 11:54 PM Share Posted October 16, 2013 at 11:54 PM It could be that the panel feels exactly the same as Myerscough and is carefully drafting an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 17, 2013 at 03:39 AM Author Share Posted October 17, 2013 at 03:39 AM Not necessarily share her opinion and line of reasoning she used to come to that but her opinion is a persuasive authority and its nature is unique in that it addresses nearly (not completely) identical subject matter within the same state not just the Circuit. Myerscough's opinion will not be lost on such a meticulous jurist like Posner. The way I see it, had the fix been in prior to the orals (slicing off 5 minutes per side could've been due to it being an appeal addressing relief not hearing an entirely new case) and as it appeared during those 25 agonizing minutes, I no longer believe any of the Judges had ruled prior to hearing the oral arguments. Posner was just in character as he took Triebel to the woodshed during the orals in Moore and this time it was Thompson who endured the verbal assault. It takes an hour at most for a seasoned judge to draft an opinion that just says "Blah blah issue at hand blah blah accordingly we affirm the District Court's order dismissing the case as moot" and so on and I have no doubt Posner would be the author unless he REALLY wants to be a...yeah and dump it off on Flaum if Flaum sides with the majority (does anyone else here think that Posner would outsource? I don't). Even if Flaum had drafted a dissent, it's still taking quite some time, much longer than I anticipated for an opinion addressing such a narrow issue to be drafted, circulated, and published. If the panel doesn't swing our way, oh well it was a shot that had to be taken and it's not like I ever believed that any of the Judges (much less all three) would sit there and ask Thompson "So, what would you like from us? Ok that sounds good. And what else? And...and...and...? You got it." I expected the order to be a gray area between the two, a compromise of sorts as opposed to outright dismissal or FOID carry until permits are actually in the hands of Illinoisans (not one or 10 permits to satisfy the mandate then its FOID system redux). After that assault on our senses (that Posner posture most haven't ever witnessed), I was pretty sure we'd see something by the end of the week, maybe end of that day and at the absolute latest the following Tuesday. Now we're almost into week two. The Circuit Judges have some decent sized caseloads (three other cases argued that morning), but the length of time that's passed so far is indicative of due diligence on the part of the Judges. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 17, 2013 at 04:01 AM Share Posted October 17, 2013 at 04:01 AM I've had a tiny ember of hope re-kindle since hearing that tongue lashing. I think due diligence is the right description. And Thanks to Graybeard for re asserting that Posner is just, off sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 17, 2013 at 04:03 AM Share Posted October 17, 2013 at 04:03 AM Thanks, to you too, skinny, for taking the time to lay this out so simple folks like me can figure out which way is up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 17, 2013 at 06:34 PM Author Share Posted October 17, 2013 at 06:34 PM No problem. I enjoy this stuff in a sick, twisted way that makes me second guess my career path haha. My girlfriend says I'm a little "off" because I read oral argument transcripts (SCOTUS) at night and giggle like a kid at some of Scalia's questions or read briefs at night for my own intellectual enrichment hehe. Just take what you learn from others (that's what I've done then delved deeper using that knowledge) and if you're truly interested in learning about the guts of the legal system, ah well I'll PM you because I helped browninghp find some suitable books on the legal system, legal reasoning, etc. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 17, 2013 at 06:56 PM Share Posted October 17, 2013 at 06:56 PM A bit off topic, but read the Randy Davis opinion released today. It's downright scary what criteria a LEO can use not only to pull you over but also on what leads to the can we search your vehicle. How can one prove or disprove following too closely to warrant the stop, and the LEO's determined that due to lack of entries in his log book they questioned how someone could make enough money to stay in business or buy aftermarket products for his truck. All of that before they were informed the truck was on a "watch" list or he told them about priors. Just shows if they want to search they will. I'm sure if I'm ever stopped and refuse a search they'll somehow get a K9 to hit, although hey won't find anything other than a spent slug in the cup holder I dug out from a deer a few years back. Back on topic, hopefully if he goes on a rant with his opinion it comes out after the veto session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted October 17, 2013 at 07:16 PM Share Posted October 17, 2013 at 07:16 PM I for one welcome the new police state rulers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:57 AM Author Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:57 AM Cooper filed a citation of additional authority, Agnello (the Circuit Clerk) docketed it on the 14th. Anyone wanna guess what he cited? If you guessed the Myerscough opinion, you'd be right Nice letter accompanying it, no movement on the docket since then. Here's Cooper's citation, didn't bother to include the actual opinion and order from Myerscough since it's already up. Citation.of.Additional.Authority.Myerscough.Opinion.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:07 AM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:07 AM So what's the potential? Is this something for the 7CA to consider in rendering an opinion, or something more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFC Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:24 AM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:24 AM You all realize that this is going to get tossed if even one permit is issued, right?They should have pushed for relief in the form of civil penalties in addition to FOID carry. And if even one continuance is granted the whole thing goes bust.We're within 90 days of this being implemented.What are the chances that a ruling will be handed down by then?I say between 0 and 5% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:29 AM Author Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:29 AM Well it tells me one thing, or implies it. That the opinion has not been drafted yet. Shepard's attorneys know WAY more than we do (ok well we know nothing at all so it's not hard to top that) about what's going on so I defer to them especially Cooper. This, at the very least, ensures that the panel is aware of the Myerscough ruling and puts that on the docket, where it's a permanent record so if the panel disregards Myerscough's ruling entirely (it can....pretty sure Posner will not) then it gives "us" more to work with if the panel comes out with something real nasty like defining what is reasonable. District Court opinions are persuasive authority where the higher court can just disregard it completely or consider it. In this case I believe Posner and Flaum will consider it (I don't think Flaum has anything to consider, IMO he's likely already on our side of the argument). Williams, ah I dunno. We shall see. Posner has been publishing opinions for cases argued before Shepard, latest one was argued on 9/24. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockerXX Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:34 AM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:34 AM You all realize that this is going to get tossed if even one permit is issued, right? The FCCA does not grant the relief requested in Moore so even when the permits are flowing, the relief sought in Moore are not moot... Will it go anywhere, only time will tell but I won't go as far as saying it's black and white just yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:47 AM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 02:47 AM Are we there yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 22, 2013 at 03:04 AM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 03:04 AM No, but we are inching the right way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm.stites Posted October 22, 2013 at 03:53 AM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 03:53 AM You all realize that this is going to get tossed if even one permit is issued, right?They should have pushed for relief in the form of civil penalties in addition to FOID carry. And if even one continuance is granted the whole thing goes bust.We're within 90 days of this being implemented.What are the chances that a ruling will be handed down by then?I say between 0 and 5%you do realize that myerscough's ruling stated that it could not be dismissed because it still banned tasers and stun guns right? theres no way possible that just issuing a permit will moot it because it still bans tasers and stun guns which were in the amended complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 22, 2013 at 12:37 PM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 12:37 PM It would be nice if they could use he Myerscough ruling on the floor this veto session as leverage. Something like "Last session we passed a concealed carry bill de to a court ruling, if we don't act now we are going to be facing yet another court ruling mandating xxxxxx" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cls74 Posted October 22, 2013 at 12:42 PM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 12:42 PM Secondly, if any of these atrocities disguised as bills happen to pass during the veto session restaraunt carry, church carry etc. can another complaint be filed by either Sheppard or Moore or will it have to be actually enacted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indigo Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:05 PM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:05 PM No problem. I enjoy this stuff in a sick, twisted way that makes me second guess my career path haha. My girlfriend says I'm a little "off" because I read oral argument transcripts (SCOTUS) at night and giggle like a kid at some of Scalia's questions or read briefs at night for my own intellectual enrichment hehe. Just take what you learn from others (that's what I've done then delved deeper using that knowledge) and if you're truly interested in learning about the guts of the legal system, ah well I'll PM you because I helped browninghp find some suitable books on the legal system, legal reasoning, etc. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 At least she knows where you are at night - you could be out at a "gentlemans' club" or worse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:27 PM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:27 PM Secondly, if any of these atrocities disguised as bills happen to pass during the veto session restaraunt carry, church carry etc. can another complaint be filed by either Sheppard or Moore or will it have to be actually enacted? Posner made it pretty clear in orals that new law = new lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:35 PM Share Posted October 22, 2013 at 01:35 PM You all realize that this is going to get tossed if even one permit is issued, right?They should have pushed for relief in the form of civil penalties in addition to FOID carry. And if even one continuance is granted the whole thing goes bust.We're within 90 days of this being implemented.What are the chances that a ruling will be handed down by then?I say between 0 and 5% i don't know and I doubt anyone else knows with any certainty. My guess would be that Posner was annoyed that the court was being used as part of a PR stunt, and that is why he reacted the way he did. He has had plenty of time to think about it. He has a history of being a very solid legal thinker. Whatever he comes up with will make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.