Accuracy Firearms, et al v Pritzker - Effingham Co - Gun/Mag Ban - Att. Thomas DeVore

[Upholder]

On 2/7/2023 at 12:27 PM, LilJim said:

Is there a time limit on how long he can appeal?

 

Definitely.  I don't know what it is, but I suspect it is either 30 or 90 days.

 

Keep in mind this is only about the TRO at this stage, so while he might bluster about an appeal, he may well not actually do so.

[jcable2]

On 2/7/2023 at 12:45 PM, Upholder said:

 

Definitely.  I don't know what it is, but I suspect it is either 30 or 90 days.

 

Keep in mind this is only about the TRO at this stage, so while he might bluster about an appeal, he may well not actually do so.

Probably to scared to appeal and have the Illinois Supreme Court reinstate the other counts. This lawsuit has potential to destroy their shell bill game. If the IL supreme Court in the end agrees about single subject and/or 3 readings imagine all the other bills that will get lawsuits that they passed in a shell. 

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 2/7/2023 at 1:01 PM, jcable2 said:

Probably to scared to appeal and have the Illinois Supreme Court reinstate the other counts. This lawsuit has potential to destroy their shell bill game. If the IL supreme Court in the end agrees about single subject and/or 3 readings imagine all the other bills that will get lawsuits that they passed in a shell. 

 

My guess is that the AG's Office is waiting for the ruling in the Caulkins' case for a statewide TRO.  

 

[2smartby1/2]

On 2/7/2023 at 1:01 PM, jcable2 said:

Probably to scared to appeal and have the Illinois Supreme Court reinstate the other counts. This lawsuit has potential to destroy their shell bill game. If the IL supreme Court in the end agrees about single subject and/or 3 readings imagine all the other bills that will get lawsuits that they passed in a shell. 

That would be fantastic.  Pretty sure the 80% law was tucked inside some bill about utility poles. 

[kingc]

On 2/7/2023 at 12:45 PM, Upholder said:

 

Definitely.  I don't know what it is, but I suspect it is either 30 or 90 days.

 

Keep in mind this is only about the TRO at this stage, so while he might bluster about an appeal, he may well not actually do so.

Doesn't the first Devore case have a permanent injunction hearing later in Feb?

[Upholder]

Yes, but the Illinois 5th circuit decision that Kwame would be appealing is about the TRO.

[Talonap]

On 2/7/2023 at 4:12 PM, 2smartby1/2 said:

That would be fantastic.  Pretty sure the 80% law was tucked inside some bill about utility poles. 

Might want to be careful what we wish for. I'm sure our side has done the same thing in the past. Don't have any idea when or what.

Edited February 8, 2023 at 03:36 PM by Talonap

[Yeti]

On 2/8/2023 at 9:35 AM, Talonap said:

Might want to be careful what we wish for. I'm sure our side has done the same thing in the past. Don't have any idea when or what.

I appreciate your thought but I’d rather have a legislative process that is fully transparent for all users and “sides”.  When the government leadership is hiding things from the people through tactics (shell bills), massive documents (we will have to read it after it passes to see what’s in it), or other tactics, that’s not the representation I wish to have and I know the interests of the people are being pushed aside while the wallets of politicians are stuffed.

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 2/2/2023 at 9:28 AM, RECarry said:

Critics claim "Legislative Privilege" makes this moot.  So that makes conspiracy to cram though unconstitutional actions acceptable? Not to We the People it doesn't.

The arrogance of IL privileged legislators reeks.

It maybe legislative privilege but it any of these people are lawyers, the BAR association might think differently. 

[mab22]

On 1/31/2023 at 5:55 PM, mauserme said:

 

The state is arguing that the Illinois Constitution mandates only a mechanical reading of a bill by title, three times on three different days, with no underlying purpose for those readings.

 

In my view, the spirit of the requirement is to put all interested parties on notice that a particular piece of legislation is moving through the process in order to ensure open, honest government of the type Speaker Welch said he was committed to.  It doesn't make any sense to require 3 readings if those readings lead to nothing else in the legislative process.

 

 

The 3 readings has been in the Illinois Constitution since the first version in 1818. 
https://archive.org/details/constitutionofst00inilli/page/6/mode/2up

page 6 towards the bottom.

Now if we can find the Illinois equivalent of the federalist papers, we might be able to see what their intent was. Going back that far I’m sure it wasn’t just for wasting taxpayers money or listen to themselves speak.

[jcable2]

TRO granted in case 3. 

[2smartby1/2]

On 2/10/2023 at 12:12 PM, jcable2 said:

TRO granted in case 3. 

😁

That is great news. 

Freedom for more people.  Eventually, this will hit statewide.  

 

[Upholder]

DeVore has reportedly filed with the IL Supreme Court to consolidate his three cases and Culkins' case into one:

 

https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/motion-filed-to-consolidate-state-level-challenges-to-illinois-gun-ban/article_68751a2a-aca1-11ed-b047-b30ea162f4cd.html

[Molly B.]

 

[THE KING]

Just received my email to join the Guardians of Liberty from Devore. 

 

I read the bylaws but I'm not sure about joining. I'd like to get some feedback from you guys on whether it's wise to join or not.  

 

All opinions are welcome. 

[solareclipse2]

On 2/16/2023 at 9:56 AM, THE KING said:

Just received my email to join the Guardians of Liberty from Devore. 

 

I read the bylaws but I'm not sure about joining. I'd like to get some feedback from you guys on whether it's wise to join or not.  

 

All opinions are welcome. 

 

 

Groucho Marx said "I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member."

[mab22]

 

 

[Molly B.]

Is there a link to the docket for Tom Devore's third case?

[Sapper6]

I believe it is Effingham County Case No. 2023MR7

 

Here is a link from Judici.

 

https://www.judici.com/courts/cases/case_history.jsp?court=IL025015J&ocl=IL025015J,2023MR7,IL025015JL2023MR7P1

 

 

[Molly B.]

Thank you!

[mab22]

On 2/16/2023 at 9:56 AM, THE KING said:

Just received my email to join the Guardians of Liberty from Devore. 

 

I read the bylaws but I'm not sure about joining. I'd like to get some feedback from you guys on whether it's wise to join or not.  

 

All opinions are welcome. 

How often do you get the chance to give Illinois politicians that passed this abomination, the family friendly rectal exam gesture?
Maybe you can frame the case and pass it down to future generations.

Why did you sign up for the case in the first place?

[SiliconSorcerer]

On 2/20/2023 at 11:50 PM, mab22 said:

How often do you get the chance to give Illinois politicians that passed this abomination, the family friendly rectal exam gesture?
Maybe you can frame the case and pass it down to future generations.

Why did you sign up for the case in the first place?

I read Devore's letter on entering appearance in Caulkins case, clearly what he said is not correct. 

His Guardians of Liberty  link is now a 404 (gone). 

[jcable2]

I noticed the state filed motions to dismiss in the 17th. Anyone seen these motions and their reasoning? 

[Euler]

Motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgement are pretty standard in any lawsuit.

[jcable2]

On 2/21/2023 at 3:46 PM, Euler said:

Motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgement are pretty standard in any lawsuit.

Would still have to have some kind of logic and reasoning, especially seeing how the appeals court reaffirmed the TRO. Wondering what they are saying why it needs dismissed. They did it after Tom filed to consolidate. 

[mab22]

On 2/21/2023 at 6:51 AM, SiliconSorcerer said:

I read Devore's letter on entering appearance in Caulkins case, clearly what he said is not correct. 

His Guardians of Liberty  link is now a 404 (gone). 

There is/was a time limit, and you had to be in one of the cases already.

[mab22]

So an update we were given is that Caulkins is going to, or wants to skip/fast forward to the Illinois Supreme court.

There was mention that he isn't going to do any discovery, and I think there was something about bypassing procedures, some of you know more about the process than I do.

So there is a risk that he goes there first and looses and then the other cases struggle to go anywhere.

Imagine an Illinois politician @#$%ing it up for the rest of us, go figure!

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 2/21/2023 at 7:48 PM, mab22 said:

So an update we were given is that Caulkins is going to, or wants to skip/fast forward to the Illinois Supreme court.

There was mention that he isn't going to do any discovery, and I think there was something about bypassing procedures, some of you know more about the process than I do.

So there is a risk that he goes there first and looses and then the other cases struggle to go anywhere.

Imagine an Illinois politician @#$%ing it up for the rest of us, go figure!

 

Was that from the DeVore stream?    He said the same thing.   I hope it isn't true.  This is why we have to be careful and not F around - it can set bad precedent. 

Too many people with hero syndrome are involved.   

Edited February 22, 2023 at 08:26 AM by Dumak_from_arfcom

[mab22]

On 2/22/2023 at 2:25 AM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

Was that from the DeVore stream?    He said the same thing.   I hope it isn't true.  This is why we have to be careful and not F around - it can set bad precedent. 

Too many people with hero syndrome are involved.   

Yes it was. 

[Upholder]

DeVore announced this evening that his three cases have been consolidated by the IL Supreme Court, with the Culkins case left separate.

 

He will also be amending the case and is offering another opportunity to add plaintiffs who would be covered by the TRO.