Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban

[springfield shooter]

On 5/4/2023 at 5:09 PM, Euler said:

 

The stay was issued by Easterbrook alone.

 

It's worth pointing out that Barnett et al. may respond to the stay to have it lifted, but (as posted above) the response needs to address Friedman v Highland Park and Wilson v Cook County. That provides us with some indication why the stay was issued in the first place. CA7 (or at least Easterbrook) considers McGlynn's injunction defective because it didn't address the precedent.

 

 

Thanks.

 

 

[steveTA84]

So now thousands upon thousands of people purchased something that they can’t take possession of at the FFL, and FFL’s are bound to loose a substantial amount of revenue from these transactions, and the courts are playing political games such as going outside of the process just to help the state. Yeah, this is getting good, and in the end, it will be worth it.  

[djmarkla]

On 5/4/2023 at 5:34 PM, steveTA84 said:

So now thousands upon thousands of people purchased something that they can’t take possession of at the FFL, and FFL’s are bound to loose a substantial amount of revenue from these transactions, and the courts are playing political games such as going outside of the process just to help the state. Yeah, this is getting good, and in the end, it will be worth it.  

From your lips to God's ears!

 

[Flynn]

I hate the setbacks and figured the 7th would be smarter and let it play out, but I guess I was wrong and it's becoming obvious that Heller & Bruen are going to require at least a 3rd or 4th Supreme Court ruling to make some judges that have a pure bigotry towards the 2nd to 'get it' and 'understand what higher court precendent is'

[richp]

If only just one more Supreme Court decision would resolve this for all time...

 

The antis are going to try to ferret out every nook and cranny available to them, and litigate every one to the fullest extent they can. And in most cases they will have the resources of government behind them to prevent the exercise of our rights.

 

It's going to be a real tough and long battle on many fronts.

[steveTA84]

On 5/4/2023 at 5:47 PM, djmarkla said:

From your lips to God's ears!

 

From another thread, even the legislators know they are on borrowed time. Even in their rationale to uphold these bans (or enact new ones), they use the two-step interest balancing approach and obviously ignore that Bruen did away with that. WA state Senators (below$ when they were preparing to draft a AWB law (just one day after the HP shooting mind you). They know that their precious gun control is dying, and so do the activist judges. https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/washington-state-senators-immediately-pushed-to-politicize-7-4-22-highland-park-shooting

 

[Hap]

So Easterbrook thinks that Friedman may still be relevant. It isn't, but he isn't going to believe that until he hears it from SCOTUS.

[Evil Porkchop]

What an utter disgrace of a judge. SCOTUS needs to step in and slap all this down.

Edited May 4, 2023 at 11:14 PM by Evil Porkchop

[MRE]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:02 PM, Hap said:

So Easterbrook thinks that Friedman may still be relevant. It isn't, but he isn't going to believe that until he hears it from SCOTUS.

To be fair, part of it should still be looked at as relevant…that being the dissent. That dissent roasted the majority (Easterbrook) opinion, saying the majority got Heller and McDonald completely wrong, and then went on to state an analysis very similar to Thomas in Bruen (sans the scrutiny part, which wouldn’t be relevant post-Bruen, but was then. History and Bruen would prove the dissent correct

 

For anyone unfamiliar and interested, here’s a link to that opinion

 

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D04-27/C:14-3091:J:Easterbrook:aut:T:fnOp:N:1541776:S:0

Edited May 4, 2023 at 11:17 PM by MRE

[ragsbo]

Anyone else sick and tired of having their taxes used to screw them out of their rights????? These maggots need to be held accountable and I wish the USSC would hold them all in contempt and lock them up for a long time.

 

[ealcala31]

On 5/4/2023 at 5:34 PM, steveTA84 said:

So now thousands upon thousands of people purchased something that they can’t take possession of at the FFL, and FFL’s are bound to loose a substantial amount of revenue from these transactions, and the courts are playing political games such as going outside of the process just to help the state. Yeah, this is getting good, and in the end, it will be worth it.  

I'm one of them. I had 2 banned deliveries that came in yesterday. Appointments were made for 2day that were cancelled. I have 2 banned deliveries coming in 2morow with appointments for Saturday, those appointments are cancelled as well. And my 1 Sunday appointment, cancelled. I have 3,800 in deliveries that are paid for and now I am BLEEP. The State of IL is winning the war in bankrupting 2A businesses 🖕

[2A4Cook]

On 5/4/2023 at 3:03 PM, davel501 said:

 

How do they create a code of ethics for the court without violating the separation of powers?

Quite simple:  they don't care about the separation of powers, only that they, themselves, not be separated from power.

[Euler]

On 5/4/2023 at 7:21 PM, imagineallthekarma said:

Whats the next move here? Can McGlynn still rule on the full case or does it go before the 7th circuit next? 

 

The case is still in McGlynn's court. Only the preliminary injunction was appealed.

 

Of course, when the case is disposed in district court, the state will appeal that, too, but that's a few months away.

 

The next move should be for Barnett et al. to respond to the stay explaining why Friedman and Wilson as precedent are not relevant, since that's what CA7/Easterbrook wants to know.

[2A4Cook]

As always, the State gets what it wants, how it wants it and when it wants it.  Ya think think they'd do this for a case brought by any of us peasants?  I have no unprofane words to express my disgust at this tyrannical act and the so-called "court" that just abetted the unlawful state in perpetrating it yet again.  This state is completely gone, and it's time to look elsewhere for somewhere to live without having a Bolshevik boot pressed against our necks.

[TargetCollector]

Of course, as soon as I post something hopeful about the 7th, they pull this.  This does make me fear we'll never truly get supreme court prescident respected by the lower courts, and we can't count on SCOTUS weighing in on every little thing.  I hope I'm wrong, though. 

[2A4Cook]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:49 PM, TargetCollector said:

Of course, as soon as I post something hopeful about the 7th, they pull this.  This does make me fear we'll never truly get supreme court prescident respected by the lower courts, and we can't count on SCOTUS weighing in on every little thing.  I hope I'm wrong, though. 

Unless and until you remove immunity from them for violating our rights (which they have no executive or legislative authorization to do!!!) and make them personally accountable for it, they will continue to flip the proverbial bird at the SCOTUS they no longer control through their Democrat political operatives masquerading as judges.  There are no consequences for them, which is why they have removed consequences from their voting base and set them loose to prey upon us as their personal goon squad of Brown Shirts.

[steveTA84]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:30 PM, ealcala31 said:

I'm one of them. I had 2 banned deliveries that came in yesterday. Appointments were made for 2day that were cancelled. I have 2 banned deliveries coming in 2morow with appointments for Saturday, those appointments are cancelled as well. And my 1 Sunday appointment, cancelled. I have 3,800 in deliveries that are paid for and now I am BLEEP. The State of IL is winning the war in bankrupting 2A businesses 🖕

Sounds like you have grounds to sue the state…

[milq]

I really can’t say what’s on my mind in polite company. 

[chislinger]

On 5/4/2023 at 5:09 PM, Euler said:

CA7 (or at least Easterbrook) considers McGlynn's injunction defective because it didn't address the precedent.

 

For Easterbrooke the Bruen decision never happened in the meantime.

[ealcala31]

On 5/4/2023 at 7:13 PM, steveTA84 said:

Sounds like you have grounds to sue the state…

I'm too broke for lawyers. I joined FFL of IL to be part of the federal lawsuits and put in a few extra bucks. I did sell a Beretta 1301 Tactical and a Glock 21 a few days ago. So I do have enough to buy some Ramen in the meantime 🤣. I won't let the State of IL see me cry yet🖕.

[ragsbo]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:57 PM, 2A4Cook said:

Unless and until you remove immunity from them for violating our rights (which they have no executive or legislative authorization to do!!!) and make them personally accountable for it, they will continue to flip the proverbial bird at the SCOTUS they no longer control through their Democrat political operatives masquerading as judges.  There are no consequences for them, which is why they have removed consequences from their voting base and set them loose to prey upon us as their personal goon squad of Brown Shirts.

Qualified immunity is being abused and should be changed to limit its scope and protection. BUT since that would take those who hide behind it to do their evil deeds to make the changes, won't happen

[Flynn]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:57 PM, 2A4Cook said:

Unless and until you remove immunity from them for violating our rights (which they have no executive or legislative authorization to do!!!) and make them personally accountable for it, they will continue to flip the proverbial bird at the SCOTUS they no longer control through their Democrat political operatives masquerading as judges.  There are no consequences for them, which is why they have removed consequences from their voting base and set them loose to prey upon us as their personal goon squad of Brown Shirts.

 

Section 1983 lawsuits are specifically made with this intent to technically break immunity and make the people individually responsible for rights violations under the color of law, but they are incredibly hard lawsuits to even get past the preliminary stages let alone win, and even harder when many judges still refuse to accept that the 2nd is a right.

 

That said, it would only take financially destorying a few with 1983 lawsuits to make the rest take notice.

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 5/4/2023 at 6:47 PM, 2A4Cook said:

As always, the State gets what it wants, how it wants it and when it wants it.  Ya think think they'd do this for a case brought by any of us peasants?  I have no unprofane words to express my disgust at this tyrannical act and the so-called "court" that just abetted the unlawful state in perpetrating it yet again.  This state is completely gone, and it's time to look elsewhere for somewhere to live without having a Bolshevik boot pressed against our necks.

 

The weaker cases were made to languish and sit idle so they could be pushed out ahead of the better cases that would follow and set bad precedent.   The good news is our side knows just how badly judges ruled in the other cases by incorrectly folllowing Bruen and Heller.   The bad news they only have a few days to respond and those northern judges are just going to ignore or bastardize Bruen and Heller.   

 

The democrats know how to play lawfare.  They play it way better than us and they invented the term and the methodology.  I've been saying it over and over.  Activist judges just don't give a (BEEP) about rules or precedent when it is in their way. 

 

It isn't just the law.  If it was just the law then we'd win every time.  It is politics... the dems know how to manipulate the system, and manipulate procedure to their advantage, because they are the system.   

 

Edited May 5, 2023 at 02:04 AM by Dumak_from_arfcom

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 5/4/2023 at 8:55 PM, Flynn said:

 

Section 1983 lawsuits are specifically made with this intent to technically break immunity and make the people individually responsible for rights violations under the color of law, but they are incredibly hard lawsuits to even get past the preliminary stages let alone win, and even harder when many judges still refuse to accept that the 2nd is a right.

 

That said, it would only take financially destorying a few with 1983 lawsuits to make the rest take notice.

 

I agree.  And the method to do that is by alleging fraud.   Immunity rarely withstands fraud and the standard of fraud seems to be getting looser each year. (just ask Bushmaster)

 

In the other thread where Todd V asked what is next, I proposed one of the next things should be a strategy for bringing 1983 lawsuits against legislators who pull a NY temper tantrum and pass the same or a more restrictive bill after a previous law has been struck down.  There has to be a way to bring a successful case.  

 

[ealcala31]

It's disappointing that a few customers are blaming me for this. I did give them the same advice we all shared. Proper procedure was Judge McGlynn would deny a stay of his injunction and then the state would appeal to the 7th Circuit. That's what I get for thinking proper procedure would apply in this case. The cost of doing business...

Edited May 5, 2023 at 02:34 AM by ealcala31

[gunuser17]

I am not sure why anyone believed that the state had to take some action in the district court before filing a notice of appeal and motion for stay at the 7th Circuit.  I an not aware of any rule that required a request for reconsideration or stay of the order at the district court.  Now I don't agree with the 7th's stay but I don't see any obvious argument that the State or Judge Easterbrook did something in violation of any rules of civil or appellate procedure.  The bottom line I suppose is that no one should give legal advice to a customer or anyone else unless they engage you as their lawyer..

[steveTA84]

 

[Sol-Invictus]

I hope the judge is up to date on all his vaxxxs.

[ealcala31]

On 5/4/2023 at 10:13 PM, gunuser17 said:

I am not sure why anyone believed that the state had to take some action in the district court before filing a notice of appeal and motion for stay at the 7th Circuit.  I an not aware of any rule that required a request for reconsideration or stay of the order at the district court.  Now I don't agree with the 7th's stay but I don't see any obvious argument that the State or Judge Easterbrook did something in violation of any rules of civil or appellate procedure.  The bottom line I suppose is that no one should give legal advice to a customer or anyone else unless they engage you as their lawyer..

I'd have to say, good advice. That's going to be my viewpoint from now on and it was a costly one. The issue many of us Dealer's have is this was the info that was passed to us. I am in FFL of IL and these were the messages passed to us from the lawyers representing us. When most Dealer's asked what's next after the injunction, this is the answer we got, including a possible rebuke the state might get for not following proper procedure. I do not think most Dealer's, including myself, was giving legal advice to our customers we were merely telling them what was told to us. The perception is, it probably did seem like legal advice. 

[davel501]

On 5/5/2023 at 7:35 AM, ealcala31 said:

I'd have to say, good advice. That's going to be my viewpoint from now on and it was a costly one. The issue many of us Dealer's have is this was the info that was passed to us. I am in FFL of IL and these were the messages passed to us from the lawyers representing us. When most Dealer's asked what's next after the injunction, this is the answer we got, including a possible rebuke the state might get for not following proper procedure. I do not think most Dealer's, including myself, was giving legal advice to our customers we were merely telling them what was told to us. The perception is, it probably did seem like legal advice. 

 

Don't beat yourself or your lawyers up. This is definitely a case of different judge different outcome. This guy clearly took Bruen as a personal attack. This one gets worse before it gets better.