Jump to content

Langley et al v Kelly - IL Gun/Magazine Ban - Thomas Maag Attorney


South Side 27
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • mauserme changed the title to Lawsuit Filed? (Langley et al v Kelly)

its hardly premature.  For the most part, you cannot buy an AR15 spring in this state, wholesalers won't sell an AR bolt to IL, and subject to those with still open FTIPs, you cannot legally acquire an Ar rifle in this state.  Its timely.

 

What I want to know, is why this is the first.  With all the money some people are collecting to file a lawsuit of this type, why is this the first?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2023 at 1:25 PM, Benbow said:

its hardly premature.  For the most part, you cannot buy an AR15 spring in this state, wholesalers won't sell an AR bolt to IL, and subject to those with still open FTIPs, you cannot legally acquire an Ar rifle in this state.  Its timely.

 

What I want to know, is why this is the first.  With all the money some people are collecting to file a lawsuit of this type, why is this the first?

 

I looked through the complaint. This is the first because it reads like a complaint written by an attorney who really wanted to be the first to file. I spend a lot of time reading court documents professionally and out of personal interest. I wouldn't be happy if one of my attorneys wrote this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2023 at 8:45 PM, mab22 said:

Why didn’t they include the FOID?

If your going to complain about the restrictions of certain weapons, the FOID prevents you from even possessing or purchasing ANY firearm OR ammunition even for something in the HOME. 
I would think a FOID challenge should be relatively easy after Bruen?
 

 

I believe we will see lawsuits for just about every 2A infringement now in IL.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Molly B. changed the title to Lawsuit Filed - Langley et al v Kelly - IL Gun/Magazine Ban
On 1/24/2023 at 1:58 PM, Upholder said:

 

The judge listed at the docket link above is John Phil Gilbert. Judge Gilbert was appointed by President G.H.W. Bush in 1992. He has served in senior status  since 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Plaintiffs seek, at this juncture, a preliminary injunction. Defendants, at this juncture,
have been formally served. Defendant Kelly has filed a Notice of Removal, and clearly has
notice of this file. In fact, on the morning that this motion was filed, the undersigned personally
advised one of the attorneys in the Illinois Attorney Generals Office, who represented that she
was assigned to work on this case, that this motion was being filed. At a minimum, they are
actually aware of this lawsuit. In fact, Defendant Shaner personally called the undersigned on
the phone, and mentioned his unhappiness with this lawsuit.

 

I'm not sure that the defendant calling the plaintiffs to whine is a winning legal strategy... but it made me chuckle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Molly B. changed the title to Langley et al v Kelly - IL Gun/Magazine Ban - Thomas Maag Attorney
  • Molly B. pinned this topic
On 1/24/2023 at 10:16 PM, steveTA84 said:

Isn’t the Crawford SA who’s getting sued one of the “good guys”?

That happens sometimes.  in ISRA v Madigan, the ISP director was a friendly, but was named in the suit in his official capacity.
(this was to keep John O'Connor and the Associated Press from getting your FOID info.)

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...