Jump to content

People v. Brown - FOID ruled unconstituional in IL District Court


Molly B.

Recommended Posts

On 3/16/2022 at 8:14 PM, illinois_buckeye said:

Agreed.  What are we at half the nation has gone to constitutional carry? Seems like a lot of things positive for gun owners in federal courts lately.  

Almoat but not quite yet, hopefully by  the end of the year.

 

We are currently at 23, with Ohio and Alabama passing. Ohio effective June 15th and Alabama Effective Jan 1 2023.

 

Indianna sitting on Gov desk. If he doesnt veto by the 22nd then it will be effective July 1 of 2022. Making Indiana #24.

 

Nebraska and Georgia are in the final stretches. Which will be #25 is hard to guess.

 

Then we Have South Carolina. If all pass we will have 27

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2022 at 11:12 PM, Molly B. said:

 

 

It took them 4 months the first time to send it back to the circuit court. Thought is it could be 4-6 mos.

 At 4 Months that puts it at July. 6 Would be Septemeber so either way after NYSPRA.

 

That opinion will obviously have some effect. Hopefully positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2022 at 10:24 PM, Texasgrillchef said:

Almoat but not quite yet, hopefully by  the end of the year.

 

We are currently at 23, with Ohio and Alabama passing. Ohio effective June 15th and Alabama Effective Jan 1 2023.

 

Indianna sitting on Gov desk. If he doesnt veto by the 22nd then it will be effective July 1 of 2022. Making Indiana #24.

 

Nebraska and Georgia are in the final stretches. Which will be #25 is hard to guess.

 

Then we Have South Carolina. If all pass we will have 27

 

 

I'm already picturing new signs in the next few years at IGOLD.  "49 other Constitutional carry states can't be wrong."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the FOID is rulled unconstitutional, I expect nothing less of Illinois to pull some half clever by half move.  Something like tweaking the laws and coming up with a FBID (Firearm Buyer ID) a card needed to buy guns and ammo, but not needed to simply own or possess or something similar.  It's basically how Illinois works, they lose in court and they pull some clever by half stunt and I don't expect them to do anything less if the FOID is rulled unconstitutional as it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Illinois currently had gun rights similar to free states, the anti gun zealots would be pointing to Chicago and screaming about all of the shootings and homicides.

But since gun rights are very restrictive, the leadership in Chicago prefers a "nothing to see here so move along and if there is something wrong it is someone else's fault " mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2022 at 2:02 PM, mikew said:

That is true, but I was referring to the letter of the law, not how it was carried out.

 

 

My understanding from reading the history was it was always a Firearm OWNER ID. I've always wondered about its relationship to the Federal GCA of 1968. Not much out there to say if the IL pols thought just licensing dealers didn't go far enough or what their aim was. If anyone has any leads on further reading, I'd be interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2022 at 10:40 AM, mikew said:

Isn't that how the FOID started out?

 

I could be entirely wrong, but I believe it always had a possession/ownership clause?  Now how much and how strict that possession/ownership was enforced when initially enacted is probably up for debate and likely depended highly on your social standing and skin color as we all know it was conceived in racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2022 at 3:14 PM, davel501 said:

... I've always wondered about its relationship to the Federal GCA of 1968. ...

 

King Richard I of Chicago (Richard Daley) was a prime proponent of both, especially after the 1968 Democratic National Convention. He really wanted to keep blacks and Latinos from owning firearms. That was also the origin of IL's (and several other states') melting point law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2022 at 9:20 AM, solareclipse2 said:

 

I'd expect nothing less than IL politicians dying on this hill. 

 

On 3/18/2022 at 9:12 AM, Jeffrey said:

I'm already picturing new signs in the next few years at IGOLD.  "49 other Constitutional carry states can't be wrong."


Indiana just passed CC, so now we are at 24, three more states are on the verge of passing CC. Georgia, Nebraska, and South Carolina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I have been reading the opinions issued on this case, is that the unconstitutionality of the law revolves more around the $10 fee then anything else. 
 

i admit I could be wrong though.

 

Which makes me afraid that the court could rule it unconstitutional based on the fee alone. Which means that the legislature could just come back and make the FOID card free.

 

just look at the rush to pass HB4296 when the courts ruled on Cook County a Forrest Preserve. Basically the new law narrows the area verbally. Yet still makes it pointless and impossible to carry there anyways.

 

The legislature will look for away around it by all possible means. 
 

Sadly the FOID isn’t going to entirely go away… UNLESS… SCOTUS on a national level says something very specific in their opinion on NYSPRA. (Based on scrutiny)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2022 at 11:17 AM, Texasgrillchef said:

Which means that the legislature could just come back and make the FOID card free.

 

We all know nothing is free, the state would still have to pay the staff to process the cards, issue the cards, maintain the databases and servers, maintain the kiosk and pay the cronie contractors, the ISP would hemorrhage if they lost FOID fees to do that...  Not saying that Illinois would not do some half clever thing like that, I fully expect them to, but without the fees they are put into a real predicament to fund the entire circus that is FOID...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 4:43 PM, Flynn said:

 

We all know nothing is free, the state would still have to pay the staff to process the cards, issue the cards, maintain the databases and servers, maintain the kiosk and pay the cronie contractors, the ISP would hemorrhage if they lost FOID fees to do that...  Not saying that Illinois would not do some half clever thing like that, I fully expect them to, but without the fees they are put into a real predicament to fund the entire circus that is FOID...

 

That seems like just the sort of predicament that the state deserves. I still can't believe the state never got sued for the Pratt shooting. Firearms should be left to the Feds, like immigration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 4:43 PM, Flynn said:

 

We all know nothing is free, the state would still have to pay the staff to process the cards, issue the cards, maintain the databases and servers, maintain the kiosk and pay the cronie contractors, the ISP would hemorrhage if they lost FOID fees to do that...  Not saying that Illinois would not do some half clever thing like that, I fully expect them to, but without the fees they are put into a real predicament to fund the entire circus that is FOID...


Not disagreeing with you. They will be put into a bind, if it’s ruled that the only part of FOID is that they are charging $10 for it. Which $10 isn’t much. Which means they won’t be able to charge anything at all. Makes ya wonder what they will do.

 

however, I think other parts might be found unconstitutional. Such as requiring to have the FOID when in the home.

 

we will see… but like I said earlier. What SCOTUS says in NYSPRA or not says will make a difference in Illinois opinion. It won’t be released before we get SCOTUS’s opinion that’s for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 5:02 PM, davel501 said:

 

That seems like just the sort of predicament that the state deserves. I still can't believe the state never got sued for the Pratt shooting. Firearms should be left to the Feds, like immigration.


In theory I like that idea… But the fed have the NFA, and They still haven’t passed national reciprocity yet.  Many states have leagalized many of the items on the NFA and don’t require your items to even be NFA registered. Only the feds require that.

 

we have states that are a lot freeer then the feds are, but some states alot stricter too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 5:02 PM, davel501 said:

 

That seems like just the sort of predicament that the state deserves. I still can't believe the state never got sued for the Pratt shooting. Firearms should be left to the Feds, like immigration.

The Illinois State Police were named in a law suit.

 

https://www.rapoportlaw.com/helpful-information/firm-news/henry-pratt-company-mass-shooting-lawsuit-filed/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 6:02 PM, davel501 said:

Good to see someone holding them accountable.

 

Based on what the ISP has stated, the issuance of the original FOID was done because the state of Mississippi did not enter Martins conviction into one of the criminal databases. So no matter how many times that he had a NICS check done, he would not have shown up as a felon. Per ISP, it was not until he submitted his CCL application with fingerprints that his felony was "discovered". Once the felony was discovered, that is when the FOD was revoked and where the ISP did not follow up on the revocation.

 

So, it appears that the alleged lack of data entry of the conviction into a database would have simply denied Martin the FOID. Now, instead of fixing the data processing issue, we have the call for fingerprints for FOIDS and potentially background checks for ammo purchases. If there is/was no change in the processes, the unfortunate situation could happen again. I really think that many have lost sight of that. Not sure if the new laws passed are really "common sense".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 6:34 PM, Stats said:

 

Based on what the ISP has stated, the issuance of the original FOID was done because the state of Mississippi did not enter Martins conviction into one of the criminal databases. So no matter how many times that he had a NICS check done, he would not have shown up as a felon. Per ISP, it was not until he submitted his CCL application with fingerprints that his felony was "discovered". Once the felony was discovered, that is when the FOD was revoked and where the ISP did not follow up on the revocation.

 

So, it appears that the alleged lack of data entry of the conviction into a database would have simply denied Martin the FOID. Now, instead of fixing the data processing issue, we have the call for fingerprints for FOIDS and potentially background checks for ammo purchases. If there is/was no change in the processes, the unfortunate situation could happen again. I really think that many have lost sight of that. Not sure if the new laws passed are really "common sense".

 

The thing is that the ISP inserted themselves into a process that 48 other states leave to the feds. I believe their exposure comes from the extra thorough vetting that the ISP is supposed to do to justify the existence of the FOID. If they are going to argue that the FOID is no better than the 4473 then they are arguing that the FOID is merely an infringement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 5:43 PM, Stats said:

This one line from the link makes you think. "Mr. Martin was then permitted to attend an Illinois State Police authorized concealed-carry training course, which trained him to become more accurate and lethal with firearms."

 

I did not become a sniper after the ISP educational detainment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened to the hearing and was underwhelmed once again. 

The biggest elephant in the room went unanswered. After seeing FOID cards take 6-9 months at times, that they suspended expiration dates during covid and now the mere FTIP check on a purchase extends the renewal were not even discussed. all perfect pushbacks to the states deminimus argument about how unintrusive the FOID is. 

 

I'll stop there as there were so many opportunities missed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was granted relief from the ISP because of a prohibitor. I met all the qualifications for my firearm rights to be restored through the state. I also believe that the FOID card is a joke and we shouldn’t need it. But my question is if the Supreme Court in Illinois or the US Supreme Court nullifies the FOID would I then be able to not own my firearms? And also there is no path Federally to get relief. Schumer blocked the funding years ago for the ATF to grant this. And no Senator even with the Republicans in control of both houses ever revisited the funding issue that could resolve this. Any experts with any idea as to where that would leave people like me? I have my Gubernatorial Clemency petition on the Governors desk. So I’m trying that path also. But that could be YEARS to say the least if ever even looked at. 

Edited by chemical operator1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...