Goldman v Highland Park - AWB

[Euler]

The case was filed in the Federal District Court of Northern Illinois on September 7. (Docket)

 

Susan Goldman is a private individual who owns firearms and magazines of the types that are banned.

 

On October 7, plaintiffs filed motions for preliminary and permanent injunctions.

On October 11, the court held a hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction (among other things). A hearing on the motion for a permanent injunction is scheduled for March 8, 2023.

 

(The court has not issued a preliminary injunction.)

[Euler]

On December 23, the City of Highland Park filed a motion in Viramontes v Cook County to combine this case into that case.

[Tvandermyde]

I did not have high hopes for this in the beginning, but seeing this is the same attorney who wrote the brief in the Naperville case, my hopes are picking up. My bet is Highland park is looking to  drag this out or they think they got a better judge in the Cook County case

[Tvandermyde]

Euler -- can you post the link tot he docket for the cook county case so I can track it?

[Silhouette]

Here is a link to the docket of the Viramontes v. Cook County case mentioned above: 
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60319877/viramontes-v-the-county-of-cook/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

There is a separate thread on the Viramontes case, but given that the cases may be combined, posting this here doesn't seem wrong.

[2A4Cook]

The Crook County case is facing a trial date.  This is a disgusting tactic to delay it by adding a new party, new discovery, etc. etc. etc.  This case was filed a year after the Crook County case.  Nothing has been done on it yet.  They're hoping to have discovery in the Crook case reopened.  Allowing this would be highly prejudicial to the Viramontes plaintiffs, not only because of the delay, but because of additional attorneys, new parties to work with, etc.  Not to mention the cheap attempts the HP'ers will make to garner sympathy over the recent tragedy there.

[Upholder]

Motion filed today to amend and supplement the complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.418942/gov.uscourts.ilnd.418942.42.0.pdf

[Upholder]

 

[Upholder]

 

[Upholder]

All of their response is an attempt to return to interest balancing and "well, the SCOTUS hasn't yet overturned anything modern that hasn't been challenged after Bruen was handed down".

 

[Upholder]

 

[jcable2]

On 1/20/2023 at 1:32 PM, Upholder said:

 

I think my 8 year old daughter know and understands more about guns then the lawyer writing this garbage. 

[mab22]

On 1/20/2023 at 1:09 PM, Upholder said:

 

SO!
If semiautomatic is deadlier then full automatic, and semiautomatic is preferred by the military then civilians should be able to own fully automatic as there would be the possibility for less carnage. 
Okay, I’ll give up my semiautomatic’s for full auto’s, but I’m not gonna be happy about it!😤

[Quiet Observer]

Romano does not know what he is talking about. The military when to burst mode because soldiers were wasting and running out of ammo in firefights. 

The M-16 fired at a rate of 700 rounds per minute. That empties a 20 round mag in less than 2 seconds. Spray and pray is a poor tactic. Three round bursts are better fire control discipline. 

Edited January 20, 2023 at 08:26 PM by Quiet Observer

[davel501]

On 1/20/2023 at 2:24 PM, Quiet Observer said:

Romano does not know what he is talking about. The military when to burst mode because soldiers were wasting and running out of ammo in firefights. 

The M-16 fired at a rate of 700 rounds per minute. That empties a 20 round mag in less than 2 seconds. Spray and pray is a poor tactic. Three round bursts are better fire control discipline. 

 

I've never seen an M16 with a swappable barrel either. A good barrel is good for 20K rounds, way less if you overheat it. Full auto could kill a barrel in as little as 500 rounds.

[davel501]

Separate thought: I give the guy credit for fighting a losing battle so hard. If he's worth his salt he understands the situation enough to argue either side of it so he knows the score and he's still throwing everything at it.

[Craigcr2]

My favorite argument was 'the plaintiffs have not met their burden to establish that assault weapons are common', but also 'both parties have stipulated that there are 24 million'

[steveTA84]

Romano is quoting Ryan Busse. Rob Romano is with FPC. He is bringing attention to absurd arguments 

[Craigcr2]

On 1/20/2023 at 2:33 PM, davel501 said:

 

I've never seen an M16 with a swappable barrel either. A good barrel is good for 20K rounds, way less if you overheat it. Full auto could kill a barrel in as little as 500 rounds.

I believe that Colt did produce one for the Canadian military. It fired from an open bolt and I think I recall it having a quick change barrel. 

[davel501]

On 1/20/2023 at 2:49 PM, Craigcr2 said:

I believe that Colt did produce one for the Canadian military. It fired from an open bolt and I think I recall it having a quick change barrel. 

 

Well I'll be dipped. I wouldn't have believed it but here I am looking right at it.

 

Quote

WAK "Interim SAW" and the BRL XM106[edit]

 

BRL XM106

At the request of the United States Marine Corps, WAK Inc. started work on an "Interim SAW" in 1977. This was to provide a more solid automatic rifle to replace the practice of the automatic rifleman switching his weapon to full-auto, and to provide this capability until the US Army's SAW trials had been completed. The WAK SAW was essentially an M16A1 converted to fire from an open bolt, accompanied by a special buffer, and featuring a specially-made compensator. In 1978 the US Army's Ballistic Research Laboratory (BRL) decided to build on the WAK concept to create a contender for the SAW trials, designated XM106. The BRL gun differed primarily in having permanently fixed handguards and a special quick-change barrel system. The handguards also had an M2 bipod originally for the M14 rifle and a vertical foregrip fashioned from an M16A1 pistol grip. Early XM106s also had the front sight moved forward along the barrel to create a longer sight radius for more accurate long range fire, but this was dropped from later versions. In the end the Army used the XM106 as a control variable during the competition and instead selected the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon.

 

Colt Automatic Rifle - Wikipedia

 

It looks like the changeable barrel variant never saw service after losing out to the SAW. The Canadian one went with a very heavy 1" thick barrel to deal with the heat.

[Euler]

On 1/20/2023 at 3:21 PM, mab22 said:

SO!
If semiautomatic is deadlier then full automatic, and semiautomatic is preferred by the military then civilians should be able to own fully automatic as there would be the possibility for less carnage. 
Okay, I’ll give up my semiautomatic’s for full auto’s, but I’m not gonna be happy about it!

 

What if the anti-gunners required you to convert all your semi-autos to switch-selectable full-auto? Or would that be a "loophole?"

[MrTriple]

On 1/20/2023 at 1:30 PM, Upholder said:

All of their response is an attempt to return to interest balancing and "well, the SCOTUS hasn't yet overturned anything modern that hasn't been challenged after Bruen was handed down".

 

Didn't they say the same about concealed carry post-Heller? "Well SCOTUS hasn't said anything yet so it's not protected"? If so, doesn't strike me as a smart strategy.

[MrTriple]

On 1/20/2023 at 2:37 PM, davel501 said:

Separate thought: I give the guy credit for fighting a losing battle so hard. If he's worth his salt he understands the situation enough to argue either side of it so he knows the score and he's still throwing everything at it.

I've wondered the same about these lawyers: Do they genuinely believe this stuff, or is this them doing the best they can with what little they've got?

[Euler]

United States Conference of Mayors, Everytown for Gun Safety, and March for Our Lives are making noise (starting January 24 and continuing) to file amici briefs.

 

The US Conference of Mayors is not a Bloomberg organization. Nevertheless its official position favors handgun regulation.

[sticky22]

On 1/31/2023 at 9:06 PM, Euler said:

United States Conference of Mayors, Everytown for Gun Safety, and March for Our Lives are making noise (starting January 24 and continuing) to file amici briefs.

 

The US Conference of Mayors is not a Bloomberg organization. Nevertheless its official position favors handgun regulation.

 

Here is a link to their amicus brief filed unironically by the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy & Protection on behalf of the Conference of Mayors

 

USCM-Amicus-Brief-Filed-Version-Jan-26-2023.pdf (usmayors.org)

 

interesting take on Bruen 

 

 Also  I don't think I have ever seen an argument that cites all the damage a law failed to prevent as a basis of upholding that same  law

[Hap]

Legal ethics, at least as taught in the early '80s, require attorneys to make the best argument they can on behalf of their clients, but prohibits them from making arguments which are total BS. Of course, what constitutes total BS is somewhat of a moving target, and when an attorney is trying to probe the boundaries of a recent Supreme Court decision, some arguments which we would consider total BS may have to get explicitly smacked down by the Court if they survive scrutiny at the lower levels.

 

Patience, and plenty of popcorn, are in order.

[Euler]

On February 16, Herrera filed a motion to consolidate Herrera v Raoul and Bevis v Naperville into Goldman v Highland Park and to reassign to the court in Bevis. Bevis and Goldman concur.

 

Edited February 17, 2023 at 03:49 AM by Euler

[Upholder]

Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction:

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.418942/gov.uscourts.ilnd.418942.81.0.pdf

[Upholder]

Defendant City of Highland Park's Surreply in Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction:

 

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.418942/gov.uscourts.ilnd.418942.87.0.pdf

[Euler]

On May 4, Highland Park filed notice of recent developments in Herrera and Barnett pointing out that McGlynn is the only judge in a post-Bruen case, including Bevis, to grant an injunction. Six other judges have deemed the Illinois AWB to be constitutional.