Dumak_from_arfcom Posted February 18, 2023 at 02:58 AM Share Posted February 18, 2023 at 02:58 AM (edited) On 2/13/2023 at 10:51 AM, Upholder said: Docket entry contains an order from the judge: 17 - Feb 13, 2023 - ORDER: ORDER: Within the response to 6 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Defendants shall provide illustrative examples of each and every item banned under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 2/13/2023. (jce) THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. (Entered: 02/13/2023) Hey, did anyone get the ISRA Thursday bulletin? RP stated the order is for the defendants to list every banned firearm. "Within is the response to (16) Motions for a Preliminary Injunction, Defendants shall provide illustrative examples of each and every banned firearm under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 2/13/2023." isra-thursday-bulletin-february-16-2023.htm Edited February 18, 2023 at 02:59 AM by Dumak_from_arfcom added link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talonap Posted February 18, 2023 at 03:09 AM Share Posted February 18, 2023 at 03:09 AM On 2/17/2023 at 8:58 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said: Hey, did anyone get the ISRA Thursday bulletin? RP stated the order is for the defendants to list every banned firearm. "Within is the response to (16) Motions for a Preliminary Injunction, Defendants shall provide illustrative examples of each and every banned firearm under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 2/13/2023." isra-thursday-bulletin-february-16-2023.htm RP is wrong. not "Firearm", it's "...every banned ITEM..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted February 18, 2023 at 03:17 AM Share Posted February 18, 2023 at 03:17 AM On 2/17/2023 at 9:09 PM, Talonap said: RP is wrong. not "Firearm", it's "...every banned ITEM..." So they (ISRA) can’t even copy/paste and order now? Jeeze..... I’m rooting for the ISRA, but come on. Get your s*** together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumak_from_arfcom Posted February 18, 2023 at 03:24 AM Share Posted February 18, 2023 at 03:24 AM On 2/17/2023 at 9:09 PM, Talonap said: RP is wrong. not "Firearm", it's "...every banned ITEM..." Yep, I know that. It's that they look to have changed the order from the judge which vastly changes the meaning of the order. In the next paragraph he then goes on to talk about the 170 banned firearms being a list from the anti-gun groups. Is he just old and forgetful, or are the ISRA lawyers telling him this. It may have been one of TV's videos, but I heard RP has claimed that the cases have been consolidated under the ISRA lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted February 25, 2023 at 12:52 AM Share Posted February 25, 2023 at 12:52 AM Court Order in Barnett v Raoul Order said: CALEB BARNETT, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. KWAME RAOUL, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:23-cv-209-SPM ** designated Lead Case DANE HARREL, et al., Plaintiffs vs. KWAME RAOUL, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:23-cv-141-SPM JEREMY W. LANGLEY, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. BRENDAN KELLY, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:23-cv-192-SPM FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES OF ILLINOIS, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. JAY ROBERT “J.B.” PRITZKER, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:23-cv-215-SPM ... The above-referenced cases are consolidated for the purposes of discovery and injunctive relief, with Barnett, et al. v. Raoul, et al, 23-cv-209 designated as the lead case. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now