Jump to content

Caulkins v Prizker Recusal Thread


mauserme

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

I agree with DeVore on this.   Caulkins already failed  to get his state-wide TRO from a court that didn't have the authority to order one.  They should not push a bad case.  He did that once in hope for a hail mary TRO.  It didn't work, now it is time to settle down, rather than rush in stupidly to the state supremes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Molly B. changed the title to Rep. Caulkins Lawsuit Against the "Assault Weapons Ban" (Caulkins v Prizker)
  • Molly B. pinned this topic
On 3/3/2023 at 10:28 PM, jcable2 said:

They are praying for a hail Mary from the State Supreme court that they will stay the ruling on Monday. Hopefully the State Supreme Court slaps JB et al a new one on Monday. They can deny the appeal and uphold the ruling ending it right then and there. 

I wouldn’t gamble them doing that. Remember that the new justices are Everytown endorsed (and were part of a recent campaign finance scheme)

https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/everytown-endorsed-il-supreme-court-justices-caught-up-in-campaign-finance-scandal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2023 at 10:16 AM, steveTA84 said:

I wouldn’t gamble them doing that. Remember that the new justices are Everytown endorsed (and were part of a recent campaign finance scheme)

https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/everytown-endorsed-il-supreme-court-justices-caught-up-in-campaign-finance-scandal

 

Then the issue is still before the Federal SD of IL court (and may be anyway?). It would be great to have the Dems' shenanigans declared unconstitutional under the Illinois Constitution. It would be better to have the 2A issues settled (read defeated) under the Constitution of the United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2023 at 10:16 AM, steveTA84 said:

I wouldn’t gamble them doing that. Remember that the new justices are Everytown endorsed (and were part of a recent campaign finance scheme)

https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/everytown-endorsed-il-supreme-court-justices-caught-up-in-campaign-finance-scandal

Another fun fact. JB setup a trust just to fund these two judges. No other donations other than these two. These judges at the SC are literally bought and paid for (by both the Governor and the IL Senate President) LOL. What’s it called when the executive branch has control over those in the judicial branch and also the legislative branch has direct influence in the judicial branch as well?.....   https://illinoissunshine.org/search/?term=Jay+Robert+Pritzker+Revocable+Trust&table_name=candidates&table_name=committees&table_name=officers&table_name=receipts&table_name=expenditures&search_date__ge=&search_date__le=

39F031BB-B7AD-417B-BC97-4F0023616056.thumb.jpeg.3d09ab5f6decd45286e5199cb5500f65.jpeg

Edited by steveTA84
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2023 at 6:49 PM, mikew said:

A revocable trust can serve other purposes, I think, if I understand my "trust and will" attorney correctly.

Point is no other candidates were given money from this trust. It was a scandal then too LOL https://illinois.gop/icymi-billionaire-gov-j-b-pritzker-uses-trust-to-skirt-his-own-contribution-limits/

Billionaire Governor J.B. Pritzker is using a trust to skirt campaign contribution limits, that he signed into law, in an effort to influence two tight Supreme Court races. From the Chicago Tribune yesterday:

“Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker is using his personal trust fund to circumvent contribution limits in two races that will determine whether his party maintains its 4-3 majority on the Illinois Supreme Court.

Pritzker earlier this year signed into law a measure that limits contributions to a judicial candidate campaign from “any single person” to $500,000.

In September, Pritzker’s campaign fund, JB for Governor, contributed $500,000 each to the campaigns of Democrats Elizabeth Rochford and Mary Kay O’Brien, who are running for two open seats on the high court. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2023 at 6:49 PM, steveTA84 said:

Caulkins needs to attack and demand that the two new judges are recused from this case ok any decision. How can they be part of any decision when they were bankrolled by the defendant?

48BC79EA-ABE3-4CBC-B325-854A903D10AE.jpeg.293319943febecac426e8d4a2de78695.jpegCDCCCA54-38BA-4C83-A2D7-6F1734DA2B76.thumb.jpeg.78f41510e7181847db4578a11ab8729c.jpeg

Is that the same “appeal” that was filed within 2 hours of the judges ruling/decision that was just “filed” with no brief, or does that contain a brief?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2023 at 6:49 PM, steveTA84 said:

Caulkins needs to attack and demand that the two new judges are recused from this case ok any decision. How can they be part of any decision when they were bankrolled by the defendant?

48BC79EA-ABE3-4CBC-B325-854A903D10AE.jpeg.293319943febecac426e8d4a2de78695.jpegCDCCCA54-38BA-4C83-A2D7-6F1734DA2B76.thumb.jpeg.78f41510e7181847db4578a11ab8729c.jpeg


You are correct.

 

That should be more than enough to force a recusal.   Pritzker is a defendant and they each received major campaign donations from him.  

 

Judge Gilbert had to recuse from our federal cases because of a conflict of interest in all cases that involve the state just because he is a trustee for SIU.    

This is much more direct conflict of interest than that. 

Hopefully someone can get word to Caulkin's legal team.   A recusal drastically changes the odds. Only 1 judge needs to flip.  

 

Edited by Dumak_from_arfcom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2023 at 1:11 AM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:


You are correct.

 

That should be more than enough to force a recusal.   Pritzker is a defendant and they each received major campaign donations from him.  

 

Judge Gilbert had to recuse from our federal cases because of a conflict of interest in all cases that involve the state just because he is a trustee for SIU.    

This is much more direct conflict of interest than that. 

Hopefully someone can get word to Caulkin's legal team.   A recusal drastically changes the odds. Only 1 judge needs to flip.  

 

Article about it 

https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/conflict-of-interest-with-il-supreme-court-and-gun-ban-ruling-appeal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tubby has literally purchased control of this state as his own, independent kingdom.  He thumbs his nose at SCOTUS, and buys judges to rubber stamp his unlawful acts.  The ISL is little more than a rubber stamp for his woke garbage and producer of more of it.  The federal government won't step in because, well ... they're totalitarian, woke D's, too.  We won't have a recognizable USA left in this continues another 2-6 years.  It's incredible how it's gone from the DNC rigging its own POTUS primary for 2016 because Bernie was too leftist to win, to Bernie being too "conservative" for the Democrats.  This is beyond insane.  And fools take the MSM's propaganda as "news" and "fact."  The Stupid is stronger than ever in Illinois and the USA.

Edited by 2A4Cook
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2023 at 11:23 AM, steveTA84 said:

Stuff added in, including ILSC ethics codes and the judge publicly showing support and running around with JB and also the lobbyists of Moms Demand Action

Ah, yes, more bought and paid for, left-wing political activist, "impartial jurists."  This state sucks.  It belongs to fat boy as his personal property, bought and paid for.  And people thought MJM was bad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2023 at 1:29 PM, 2A4Cook said:

Ah, yes, more bought and paid for, left-wing political activist, "impartial jurists."  This state sucks.  It belongs to fat boy as his personal property, bought and paid for.  And people thought MJM was bad.  

Rochford isn’t/wasn’t shy on social

media. Judge O’Brien was at least smart enough to delete her account LOL! Honestly though, that opens a new can of worms A09F0905-1156-4CF8-9573-5C2D4B82648B.jpeg.a2a3f0cde3178fd7aab13b1315bfedea.jpegF2DED5D2-9BA5-4E26-AA40-703B853F9466.thumb.jpeg.c801501b837642d6a892ee578c582993.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2023 at 11:15 AM, steveTA84 said:

David Codrea included the Pritzker/judges stuff in his blog today 

 

https://waronguns.com/the-real-conspirators/

 

and shared it (main link) on his Twitter page 

 

https://twitter.com/dcodrea/status/1632786141177864192?s=46&t=1BxSmhUHyJWobMns6vONJw

 

Nice job Steve..  now Twitter is down.  They are probably raiding Elon currently and have him in handcuffs while they plant child porn / classified documents / Hunter's whatever in his home / office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2023 at 12:56 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

We shall see if Caulkin's legal team does anything with this info.   It is a clear and direct conflict of interest and those two judges should recuse themselves. Lets see if there is pushback from anyplace else. 

If there isn’t direct pushback, I would be questioning heavily why.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • mauserme changed the title to Caulkins v Prizker Recusal Thread
  • mauserme unpinned this topic
  • Molly B. locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...