Jump to content

ISRA vs ISP FOID delays - Bradley vs Kelly


Recommended Posts

From what I'm reading, they'd better not make a habit of doing this...

 

It's standard operating procedure for Illinois and because they are 'The State' the judges almost always tolerate it and allow it to continue well beyond what would be allowed from other defendants.

 

Personally I'm of the opinion that when the courts sets a deadline it's a deadline unless you can prove to the court that there were extenuating circumstances that were unable to be overcome you are SOL, but that isn't the way it works, these judges will hand out 30 day extentions like participation trophies as long as 'The State' files a motion asking for one... If the judges and courts stuck to their deadlines there wouldn't be decade long backups in the stupid court system...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can the defense effectively complain to the judge and make an actual redline?

 

 

The defense is the one that basically controls the trial speed in most cases and it's used to drag out the court case and wear down the plantiff's resolve (not only in these big cases but even in small cases) the plantiff can complain but it's essentially a waste of time especially when the a government agency is the one delaying things they will almost always be given the benefit of doubt by the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17366674/bradley-v-kelly/

 

72 Feb 1, 2021

 

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Plaintiffs' unopposed motion to file overlength brief instanter 70 is granted. Plaintiffs shall file attached reply as a separate entry on the docket. Mailed notice. (dm, ) (Entered: 02/01/2021)

 

Main Doc

 

73 Feb 2, 2021

 

REPLY by Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. to response in opposition to motion, 67 (for Preliminary Injunction) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Richard Pearson, # 2 Exhibit Group 2 - Declarations of Alekseev, Schamaun, Kirkland, and DiCarlantonio)(Sigale, David) (Entered: 02/02/2021)

 

Main Doc

 

Att 1

 

Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Richard Pearson

 

Att 2

 

Exhibit Group 2 - Declarations of Alekseev, Schamaun, Kirkland, and DiCarlantoni

 

74 Feb 5, 2021

 

MEMORANDUM by Bruce C Davidson, Sarah Davidson in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim 61 (Davidson, Bruce) (Entered: 02/05/2021)

 

Main Doc

 

75 Feb 5, 2021

 

RESPONSE by Jarod Ingebrigtsen, Brendan F. Kellyin Opposition to MOTION by Intervenor Plaintiffs Matthew Bryar Smith, Karen Gordon, Thomas Anthony Smith, Julie A Bryar-Smith to intervene 57 (Opposition to Thomas A. Smith Only) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Filing)(Johnston, Mary) (Entered: 02/05/2021)

 

Main Doc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly these delays still won’t be enough of a push to get the FOID act repealed. They don’t give a crap that it’s essentially a ban on the 2nd. It’s absurd that you have to pay $10 to pass a background check to be able to buy a gun after passing a second background check.

 

I’d like to know how many people have been assaulted, raped or murdered while waiting to get permission from the ISP to utilize their 2A rights. My mother has a friend whose daughter is going through a divorce. Her soon to be ex is batshit crazy and now a druggie iirc. She’s got a restraining order but that will do F all to protect her. The cops will surely do a thorough investigation after he kills her.

 

Her father is a gun owner so you can guess what my advice for this woman was. Alive and in legal trouble is better than dead with a clean record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The attorney should put Mr. Kelly on the stand and ask him if his statements to the press, as quoted below, are accurate.

 

Illinois State Police Director Brendan Kelly says the backlog of gun owner licenses is “absolutely unacceptable” and the department is doing what they can.

State police data shows new FOID applications are taking an average of nearly 120 days, when it’s only supposed to take weeks. The backlog has, at times, exceeded 100,000.


Thursday in Springfield, Kelly said the delays are “absolutely unacceptable.”

“And they can’t be tolerated,” Kelly said. “These are important legal issues. These are important public safety issues. And, we have to get to a system that is easy and simple and straightforward for the good guys and very hard for the bad guys to get a gun.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The attorney should put Mr. Kelly on the stand and ask him if his statements to the press, as quoted below, are accurate.

 

Illinois State Police Director Brendan Kelly says the backlog of gun owner licenses is “absolutely unacceptable” and the department is doing what they can.

State police data shows new FOID applications are taking an average of nearly 120 days, when it’s only supposed to take weeks. The backlog has, at times, exceeded 100,000.Thursday in Springfield, Kelly said the delays are “absolutely unacceptable.”“And they can’t be tolerated,” Kelly said. “These are important legal issues. These are important public safety issues. And, we have to get to a system that is easy and simple and straightforward for the good guys and very hard for the bad guys to get a gun.”

There's no way they're accurate. His most recent statement said the backlog has been over 100,000 applications AT TIMES. I've been tracking this since January & the numbers go back a year. They've been over that the whole freaking lockdown. Any updates on this case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

On 9 June 2021, the case was recaptioned (renamed) Marszalek v Kelly. The original individual plaintiffs had all received their FOIDs, so the SAF and ISRA found new individual plaintiffs for the case.

 

On 26 January 2022, the judge dismissed the individual plaintiffs, leaving only the SAF and ISRA, and dismissed one of the counts (14A violation) of the complaint. The case continues.

 

Docket

Opinion said:

...

Count I: Second Amendment Claim

 

This crux of Plaintiffs' claim is that Defendants' delays in issuing FOID cards violates the Second Amendment.

...

At this point the Court determines the Plaintiffs have stated a plausible Second Amendment claim.

 

Count II: Fourteenth Amendment Claim

 

The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits any State from depriving "any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." ...

 

Initially, although Plaintiffs have framed this claim as alleging violations of "procedural due process," ... their allegations also suggest a substantive due process theory. ... Although Plaintiffs bring this theory of relief under the due process framework, it is another attempt to state a Second Amendment claim based upon a State's constraint of Plaintiffs' right to bear arms. Where another provision of the Constitution "provides an explicit textual source of constitutional protection, a court must assess a plaintiff's claims under that explicit provision and not the more generalized notion of substantive due process." Conn v. Gabbert (1999)

...

Plaintiffs' Fourteenth Amendment claim is also deficient if considered under the procedural due process framework because the due process clause does not, as Plaintiffs argue, compel the government to adjudicate FOID card applications "within a specific and brief time."

...

To be sure, these allegations suggest that Defendants have possibly violated a state statute. But it is well-established that a "failure to follow state statutes or state-mandated procedures does not amount to a federal due process claim of constitutional magnitude." Dietchweiler by Dietchweiler v. Lucas (7th Cir. 2016). For these reasons, this Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to state a cognizable due process claim.

...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
On 10/2/2022 at 8:22 AM, Molly B. said:

Even though the cases of plaintiffs Marszalek and Luce are too be dismissed,  Singleton was also a named plaintiff and I believe that case remains active. 

 

True for the Singleton case.

 

The Bradley/Marszalek case (even though neither Bradley nor Marszalek are still plaintiffs) is/was about FOID delays. Technically it's still active, because the judge hasn't dismissed it yet. When the plaintiffs say they no longer have a claim, dismissal is pretty certain, though.

 

The Singleton case is about appeal delays and is still active.

The Luce case is about CCL delays and is still active.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 10/2/2022 at 2:04 AM, Euler said:

On September 29, Marszalek, ISRA, and SAF asked for the court to dismiss the case, stating that the ISP has caught up and that there are no longer any FOID processing delays.

 

Just a follow-up (that I seem to have forgotten):

 

On October 3, the judge dismissed the case, as requested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Can someone explain this to me? I argued for years for us to sue ISP for their never ending delays. ISRA negotiated a bill to give them 60 business  days (120 calendar days) and they still could not make it and then waived the expiration date with COVID. 

 

skip forward new FOID kinda sorta don't have an expiration. Yet even with the 60 day rule, we had people waiting over a year to get their FOID as first time applicants or people who let their's lapse and were treated as first timers again. 

 

So you don't get a consent decree or anything to make sure they don't run over like they have a history of doing as two auditor general reports show. You just agree to dissmiss it? Is this one of the wins you often tout with your great legal strategy? which appears to be more of throw stuff on a wall and see what sticks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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