Foid in the Federal court

[FLMOPE]

Simple question.

 

How do we ever get the FOID card infringement in a federal court?

 

Given the Bruen case I can't see the FOID surviving a federal court challenge.

 

I am not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV,

[2A4Cook]

Federal subject manner, meaning, a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

[Flynn]

With the current SCOTUS ruling repeating that the 2n is a civil right subject to the new test, there is technically standing in Federal court already for FOID, but chances are Federal courts will kick it back to state to tinker around with for a bit.

[mab22]

Who's starting the suite, and where do we chip in an pass the hat to get it on already?

 

[Craigcr2]

It’ll happen eventually but our side needs to be patient and remember that there’s a scarcity of resources. There are only so many attorneys with the right background to bring good 2A cases and funding is an issue.

 

In the immediate future we want the best attorneys focused on new attacks like CA & NY’s new carry laws. They’ll whittle the rest of the country’s bad laws down as resources allow. 
 

It’s easy to forget in our zeal, but groups like FPC have well reasoned litigation strategies and invest heavily in research/planning.

[Tvandermyde]

Everyone wants the FOID to go away. But what most fail to understand is the best way to see that happen is to build a strong foundation of a legal basis. 

We have seen the Illinois Supreme court at times do everything they can to avoid a constitutional question around 2A issues when they can. Several previous cases failed becuase courts inserted their own judgement and applied the wrong test, The court has clarified that and given them guidance on how to apply a test. 

 

yet there were all kinds of lawyers who just ran to court screaming Heller and Second Amendment and lost cases and for the last 10 years set bad precident.. Now all those are gone and we get to start over. 

 

There are several of us looking at how to approach the issue, but it takes time money and smart lawyers. 

 

Right now the Anti-gunners have Saul Cornell working overtime trying to find every 1791 regulation they can to try and put a cork in the dike that is leaking to try and preserve as much as they can. Hense part of the reason I asked Valinda to pull all the amici briefs. We get a new standard of review we will have one chance to make a first impression about it. 

And we better get our arguments right, in front of the right court with the best fact pattern we can.  I want the FOID card gone more than anyone. But there are a lot of other things I want to see gone as well. And in my book, we need to do this right not sloppy

[illinois_buckeye]

I don’t necessarily agree with the foid, but I agree they need the best attorneys working on places like New York and California.  Illinois is definitely annoying at times, but compared to places like New York we’ve got it pretty easy unless you are in Chicago or that area.  

[Flynn]

On 7/3/2022 at 9:34 PM, illinois_buckeye said:

I don’t necessarily agree with the foid, but I agree they need the best attorneys working on places like New York and California.  Illinois is definitely annoying at times, but compared to places like New York we’ve got it pretty easy unless you are in Chicago or that area.  

 

I agree, places like New York, California and Hawaii are bound to provide far better cases to take up the court ladder.  NY is already paving the road in haste to nationwide precedent cases.

[RANDY]

Maryland's HQL is already being challenged, so it they win, that case starts laying the groundwork for other states licenses.

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 7/4/2022 at 12:58 AM, Flynn said:

 

I agree, places like New York, California and Hawaii are bound to provide far better cases to take up the court ladder.  NY is already paving the road in haste to nationwide precedent cases.

I see NY has public transportation as a restricted place as well that is unquestionably one of the most important places to carry.  The record of crimes should certainly support that. 

[richp]

I have always seen the public transit prohibition as an equal protection violation. People with fewer resources, including many minorities, are reliant on busses and trains, yet cannot protect themselves.

[Lou]

On 7/4/2022 at 8:20 AM, richp said:

I have always seen the public transit prohibition as an equal protection violation. People with fewer resources, including many minorities, are reliant on busses and trains, yet cannot protect themselves.

As they say in the IT world; that isn't a bug, it’s a feature.  

[Bubbacs]

On 7/3/2022 at 6:19 AM, Craigcr2 said:

It’ll happen eventually but our side needs to be patient and remember that there’s a scarcity of resources. There are only so many attorneys with the right background to bring good 2A cases and funding is an issue.

Us equal patience

Them equal zeal

 

Us need resources

Them unlimited resources

 

Us few attorneys who know the 2a

Them again unlimited attorneys who know anti 2a (a speciality)

 

Us we have no deep pocket donors supporters who care to openly speak about guns( especially the ones they have)

Them they have outspoken deep deep pockets not afraid to spend

 

Lastly our organizations are focused on keeping their positions and pay checks just long enough to pass along to the next windowlicker!

[2A4Cook]

On 7/3/2022 at 7:18 AM, Tvandermyde said:

Everyone wants the FOID to go away. But what most fail to understand is the best way to see that happen is to build a strong foundation of a legal basis. 

We have seen the Illinois Supreme court at times do everything they can to avoid a constitutional question around 2A issues when they can. Several previous cases failed becuase courts inserted their own judgement and applied the wrong test, The court has clarified that and given them guidance on how to apply a test. 

 

yet there were all kinds of lawyers who just ran to court screaming Heller and Second Amendment and lost cases and for the last 10 years set bad precident.. Now all those are gone and we get to start over. 

 

There are several of us looking at how to approach the issue, but it takes time money and smart lawyers. 

 

Right now the Anti-gunners have Saul Cornell working overtime trying to find every 1791 regulation they can to try and put a cork in the dike that is leaking to try and preserve as much as they can. Hense part of the reason I asked Valinda to pull all the amici briefs. We get a new standard of review we will have one chance to make a first impression about it. 

And we better get our arguments right, in front of the right court with the best fact pattern we can.  I want the FOID card gone more than anyone. But there are a lot of other things I want to see gone as well. And in my book, we need to do this right not sloppy

They are now caught red handed (ab)using the FOID check system as a blatant, unlawful firearms registry.  I would say that now is the time.  Start it off with a suit for an injunction.

[mab22]

On 7/3/2022 at 9:34 PM, illinois_buckeye said:

I don’t necessarily agree with the foid, but I agree they need the best attorneys working on places like New York and California.  Illinois is definitely annoying at times, but compared to places like New York we’ve got it pretty easy unless you are in Chicago or that area.  

The beatings will continue until moral improves!

We only get flogged twice a day, but those poor people get flogged 4 times a day!
 

[Texasgrillchef]

Like several mentioned previously.

 

it will require a lawsuit.

 

A lawsuit requires a lawyer willing to take the case, but to win the case requires a lawyer skilled enough to do so. Those lawyers are few and far between. Many are already over booked. One of the best.. Paul Clement, has more cases then he can handle for the most part and isn’t even taking any new cases currently. (I checked)

 

In addition to that, it requires deep pockets, lots and lots of money.

 

The Bruen case, has cost almost a million bucks to prosecute. Duncan v Bonta, has cost almost that as well. It is not cheap to take a case as far as SCOTUS.

 

Thats one reason you see so many groups like the NRA, or The FPC, NYSPRA, SAF, etc take on the big cases. Because we fund groups like that with our membership and our donations, and even purchases.

 

Of course we get additional funding reimbursed when we actually win and the other side has to pay us back. That money in turn is used to fund new cases.

 

Sadly there aren’t very many ultra rich that are willing to spend a million to help protect our rights. If I was Mark Cuban, with a few billion. I’d be willing to spare a million to take on a case. Instead of buying my third home for 50 mil. Hey but that’s me, to each his own.

 

Someone, will eventually file suit and get FOID overturned.

 

Keep in mind too thoug,ph, it took 111 years to overturn New York’s Sullivan law.

 

Also realize, that their are priorities as well for each group. Some of the things that take priority now, are getting AWB’s, Mag Cap Bans, Ghost Guns, 3D printing, Bump Stocks, Triggers, Pistol Braces, Sensitive Places, and now even still carry permit laws overturned before we work on smaller items like FOID. Not to say overturning FOID isn’t important.

 

But with your money if you could only support one cause above… which would it be?

for me, all of my money donated to a cause is still be directed to overturn all the unconstitutional carry laws. And now we have even new ones coming from CA and NY still!

[Texasgrillchef]

On 7/4/2022 at 8:01 AM, SiliconSorcerer said:

I see NY has public transportation as a restricted place as well that is unquestionably one of the most important places to carry.  The record of crimes should certainly support that. 

 

Yes, and Heller and one other gentleman are challenging carrying in D.C. on public transit. If that goes to SCOTUS that will control and change what happens in NY on their subway. Even if it doesn’t, it lays groundwork for future cases.

 

Thats the other thing too many don’t realize.

 

Sometimes we need other cases to go first to lay groundwork for other cases. Even when those other cases on the surface don’t seem relevant.

 

Take Bruen for example. Some would have said nothing about that case would help other cases like Mag Bans, or AWB. But in fact it does, and it did, and it will.

 

Bruen laid out groundwork for how future 2A cases should be decided, it removed the previous old 2 step approach and replaced it with strict scrutiny using THT. It strengthens and explains Heller and McDonald in more detail. It even strengthend Heller and McDonald as well.

 

So even though Bruen was mainly about good cause requirements on carry permits. It went far beyond that. It went on to even say we have a right to carry outside our home, we have a right to self defense and protection. It went on to say the 2A core meaning, or one of its core meanings is self defense and self protection.

 

So sometimes we need those other cases to go first to help our case proceed as well.

 

Currently in our courts, State, or Federal district, or Circuit are cases covering almost all aspects of our 2A rights. Those that haven’t been filed yet, will be when other cases are cleared with a win.

 

[John Q Public]

Bottom line is we need to pick our battles wisely, we have precedent in our favor now... what we don't want to do is bring the wrong case/s We don't want to lose cases, or have an unfavorable outcome that can set us back. 

 

I know we would all like to pile on everything at once, but it's not feasible to do so, we need to be smart about how, what, where and who brings the next round to the judiciary.

 

JQ

[Texasgrillchef]

Keep in mind that there are big reasons why certain 2A cases were denied Cert even right before either of the NYSPRA cases, or even between the two cases.

 

Two big reasons…. 
 

1. SCOTUS was itching to slap NY a new one when they mooted the first NYSPRA cases.

 

2. The other cases if you looked closely all had little issues with them, issues big enough to creat problems if they took that case.

 

3. NY Sullivan’s law has been on the books for 111 years, it was racist to begin with. Clearly a law that needed knocked down even more so then any of the other May issue states. 
 

One thing to note, be prepared. NY and Ca are about to get their a** handed to them again here in the next year or two.

 

SCOTUS and Especially Justice Thomas as well as Alito don’t take to kindly to states that flagrantly thumb their nose up to them and give them the ole middle finger. Trust me, when it makes it back to SCOTUS. You will see their wrath for sure!

 

SCOTUS is no where done with their conservative issuing of opinions. Now they have a clear 6, things will be changing for sure.

[mab22]

On 7/5/2022 at 4:23 PM, Texasgrillchef said:

Keep in mind that there are big reasons why certain 2A cases were denied Cert even right before either of the NYSPRA cases, or even between the two cases.

 

Two big reasons…. 
 

1. SCOTUS was itching to slap NY a new one when they mooted the first NYSPRA cases.

 

2. The other cases if you looked closely all had little issues with them, issues big enough to creat problems if they took that case.

 

3. NY Sullivan’s law has been on the books for 111 years, it was racist to begin with. Clearly a law that needed knocked down even more so then any of the other May issue states. 
 

One thing to note, be prepared. NY and Ca are about to get their a** handed to them again here in the next year or two.

 

SCOTUS and Especially Justice Thomas as well as Alito don’t take to kindly to states that flagrantly thumb their nose up to them and give them the ole middle finger. Trust me, when it makes it back to SCOTUS. You will see their wrath for sure!

 

SCOTUS is no where done with their conservative issuing of opinions. Now they have a clear 6, things will be changing for sure.

Don’t count on Roberts, he’s a contortionist, at best you may be able to count on 5.

 

[SiliconSorcerer]

Wow I didn't realize until latest current events you couldn't get a FOID until you were 21, how can you treat one adult different than another?   

That's blatantly unconstitutional.  Even if you were to accept the rifle vs handgun how the .. would you get one anyhow? 

My kids had FOID's by 9 I guess I just never looked back.... 

[mab22]

On 7/7/2022 at 10:01 AM, SiliconSorcerer said:

Wow I didn't realize until latest current events you couldn't get a FOID until you were 21, how can you treat one adult different than another?   

That's blatantly unconstitutional.  Even if you were to accept the rifle vs handgun how the .. would you get one anyhow? 

My kids had FOID's by 9 I guess I just never looked back.... 

I was adamant that my wife get a FOID, if 1 round of ammo fell out of a bag or if I picked up some ammo and left it in the trunk and she used my car and something happened, she would be in violation and charged 1 count for each round. Let’s look at the same situation with a firearm, not loaded, and you forget to take it out of the trunk and your 18 year old kid, or other family members borrows your car and something happens. Forget about leaving a loaded firearm in the car, in the above scenarios, they would be in an even worse situation in addition to not having a FOID or CCL.
learned that in CCL class. 
But, and I DO NOT AGREE WITH STATEMENT, as some instructors will say, it keeps guns out of the people that shouldn’t have them. I doubt they have payed attention to Chicago and all it’s gun issues.
 

[SiliconSorcerer]

I suspect the application forms now have "other" for sex as well, should have Male _ Female _ Denied _ 

 

[John Q Public]

@Mab 

 

That's not true on the ammo or a gun in the car under FOID, if the person did not know they can not be charged. 

 

The CCL is another story...

[mab22]

On 7/7/2022 at 1:05 PM, John Q Public said:

@Mab 

 

That's not true on the ammo or a gun in the car under FOID, if the person did not know they can not be charged. 

 

The CCL is another story...

Are you saying they will not be arrested by telling the police it's not mine and I didn't know it was in there?

[JTHunter]

On 7/5/2022 at 4:23 PM, Texasgrillchef said:

SCOTUS and Especially Justice Thomas as well as Alito don’t take to kindly to states that flagrantly thumb their nose up to them and give them the ole middle finger. Trust me, when it makes it back to SCOTUS. You will see their wrath for sure!

 

SCOTUS is no where done with their conservative issuing of opinions. Now they have a clear 6, things will be changing for sure.

 

Let us hope and pray that the court's make-up doesn't change in the near future.  Otherwise - - - . 🤢

[John Q Public]

On 7/7/2022 at 2:06 PM, mab22 said:

Are you saying they will not be arrested by telling the police it's not mine and I didn't know it was in there?

Say I have a FOID, but my wife does not and I forget and leave ammo in the car. If the police found it and ask her if she was aware of the ammo being in the car, and she says no. She has not violated the FOID act. The assumption is that she did not know. The same for a legal firearm. The law states that they must, "knowingly violate." Does this mean the cop will know the law, or that they won't grab the gun/ammo and arrest her? If they do, there would be a good case for false arrest. 

 

As to how this would work with a loaded firearm...  I have no doubt, this would have to get sorted in court. I don't know that we have case law on it and I know of nothing in the CC or FOID which would deal with that issue. One would think, if they did not know, the same should apply, but with UUW law, and this being Illinois, well, I wouldn't hazard a guess without it being spelled out, or some court cases to have precedent.  

 

A short version of it can be found here:  https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/hunting/documents/transportyourfirearmlegally.pdf

[Craigcr2]

On 7/8/2022 at 10:12 AM, John Q Public said:

Say I have a FOID, but my wife does not and I forget and leave ammo in the car. If the police found it and ask her if she was aware of the ammo being in the car, and she says no. She has not violated the FOID act. The assumption is that she did not know. The same for a legal firearm. The law states that they must, "knowingly violate." Does this mean the cop will know the law, or that they won't grab the gun/ammo and arrest her? If they do, there would be a good case for false arrest. 

 

As to how this would work with a loaded firearm...  I have no doubt, this would have to get sorted in court. I don't know that we have case law on it and I know of nothing in the CC or FOID which would deal with that issue. One would think, if they did not know, the same should apply, but with UUW law, and this being Illinois, well, I wouldn't hazard a guess without it being spelled out, or some court cases to have precedent.  

 

A short version of it can be found here:  https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/hunting/documents/transportyourfirearmlegally.pdf

I think a lot of us lose sight of this point when we get hung up

on the nuance of the law.
 

She very likely will be arrested and charged. Beating it in court will cost money and be emotionally expensive. The process is the punishment even if you win. 

[John Q Public]

@Craig Are you talking about a loaded firearm, or just ammo or properly stored unloaded under FOID. I know of at least two cases where the person didn't know and they didn't arrest. One was ammo and the other a firearm, one case the ammo was taken, and the other the husband was called down to take possession of the firearm under FOID. He then spent the next month sleeping with his beloved Golden.

 

This is NOT to say how and officer will react. The officer/Trooper knew the law well and decided to just call the husband on the firearm. He could have taken the firearm and had the husband come pick it up. Anyway, my advice is to always have all household members have the FOID. Don't put someone in this position. If you search my vehicle you will always be able to find a stray case, cartridge or primer rattling around. I used to shoot competitions and one day I got home and there in the windshield to hood juncture there were two cases. lol I reload, so all the brass comes back to the car and invariably down into a wheel well or other nook. Since I refuse to tear out the carpet or go over it like forensics, there will be something somewhere to be found. 

[Craigcr2]

On 7/8/2022 at 10:30 AM, John Q Public said:

@Craig Are you talking about a loaded firearm, or just ammo or properly stored unloaded under FOID. I know of at least two cases where the person didn't know and they didn't arrest. One was ammo and the other a firearm, one case the ammo was taken, and the other the husband was called down to take possession of the firearm under FOID. He then spent the next month sleeping with his beloved Golden.

 

This is NOT to say how and officer will react. The officer/Trooper knew the law well and decided to just call the husband on the firearm. He could have taken the firearm and had the husband come pick it up. Anyway, my advice is to always have all household members have the FOID. Don't put someone in this position. If you search my vehicle you will always be able to find a stray case, cartridge or primer rattling around. I used to shoot competitions and one day I got home and there in the windshield to hood juncture there were two cases. lol I reload, so all the brass comes back to the car and invariably down into a wheel well or other nook. Since I refuse to tear out the carpet or go over it like forensics, there will be something somewhere to be found. 

 

My thought when I typed that was a firearm without regard to whether or not it was loaded.

 

I agree that its a wise idea to get the FOID to avoid the risk. When I was first married my wife had zero interest in guns and it had never occurred to me that she should have a FOID. That changed several years ago when I had a conversation on a hunting trip with a friend that worked for Normal PD. His opinion of was that half of his department would arrest her if I left a slug in my truck & she got pulled over in it the following week. A lot of it comes down to the department's culture and leadership; some err toward the side of arresting and letting the lawyers figure it out when it comes to anything firearm related.