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

[steveTA84]

 

[G214me]

IMO There's no way Judge McGlynn can look at this massive ban everything, be vague all over the place and slap everyone with a felony mess and think it can pass the Bruen decision. The fact that the law is so way over the top is what will probably get it knocked down. I say he'll rule in our favor within 2 weeks. It would have been sooner but Commie Raoul and his 2000 page pile of toilet paper will take the Judge some time to go over.

[Molly B.]

On 4/12/2023 at 5:39 PM, THE KING said:

Please give us your readers digest version of this. 

 

 

The attorney for the opposition was nervously dancing from one foot to the other and at the end he was mopping his brow with a big handkerchief. There was good reason... they did not have an argument to stand on. 

[THE KING]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:13 PM, Molly B. said:

 

 

The attorney for the opposition was nervously dancing from one foot to the other and at the end he was mopping his brow with a big handkerchief. There was good reason... they did not have an argument to stand on. 

Awesome, thanks 

[Molly B.]

https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_7ce72514-d98a-11ed-a429-b7761ed13692.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-share

[steveTA84]

 

lets keep this handy for Bob, the commie mommies and also that psycho Highland Park lady, Ashbey Beasley

 

[steveTA84]

Um lol. I thought interest balancing was not allowed 😂

[AlphaKoncepts aka CGS]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:27 PM, Molly B. said:

https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_7ce72514-d98a-11ed-a429-b7761ed13692.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-share

Does Bishop sleep?

[AlphaKoncepts aka CGS]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:33 PM, steveTA84 said:

 

lets keep this handy for Bob, the commie mommies and also that psycho Highland Park lady, Ashbey Beasley

 

I look forward to reproducing this photo in a few months when this case is settled.

 

[lilguy]

Where does this go on appeal?

[Molly B.]

On 4/12/2023 at 11:51 PM, lilguy said:

Where does this go on appeal?

 

 

U.S. 7th Circuit Appellate Court

[Flynn]

On 4/12/2023 at 8:45 PM, steveTA84 said:

Um lol. I thought interest balancing was not allowed 😂

 

They literally have nothing else to argue so they will just keep repeating interest balancing over and over again, it's sad and comical all in one!

 

But, I say let them keep arguing it, the more time they spend arguing that the less time they have to find an analog law application and argue that.

[Euler]

On 4/12/2023 at 9:45 PM, steveTA84 said:

Um lol. I thought interest balancing was not allowed

...

 

On 4/13/2023 at 1:20 AM, Flynn said:

They literally have nothing else to argue ...

 

"Public Interest" is just his job title, meaning he supposedly pursues litigation for the common good, which includes public policy. (I suspect Steve knew that.)

[steveTA84]

Yeah I know that. It’s just funny cuz the perceived  “the common good” doesn’t matter anymore under Bruen

[mauserme]

On 4/13/2023 at 5:02 AM, steveTA84 said:

Yeah I know that. It’s just funny cuz the perceived  “the common good” doesn’t matter anymore under Bruen

 

I look at that a different way.

 

The common good means respect for our rights - all of our rights.  The common good is adherence to the Constitution and to the founding principles.  "The common good" once again means what it once did, in regard to the 2A.

 

 

[steveTA84]

On 4/13/2023 at 5:45 AM, mauserme said:

 

I look at that a different way.

 

The common good means respect for our rights - all of our rights.  The common good is adherence to the Constitution and to the founding principles.  "The common good" once again means what it once did, in regard to the 2A.

 

 

Then the irony is even more apparent, as he’s arguing against all of that 

[springfield shooter]

On 4/13/2023 at 12:07 AM, Molly B. said:

 

 

U.S. 7th Circuit Appellate Court

 

The "Current composition of the court" can be found here.

 

In addition, the Supreme Court justice assigned to the 7th Circuit is Amy Coney Barrett.

[mikew]

Point to consider:

 

Our side must lose in order for our side to mount an appeal.

 

an appeal from who ever loses in the southern district seems likely at this point to get us to the 7th.
 

But to get from the 7th to SCOTUS would either require us to lose in the 7th,
or for Kwame and JB to not be content with a loss there.

 

Ezell and Shepard/Moore did not get appealed to SCOTUS.

[Evil Porkchop]

On 4/13/2023 at 11:43 AM, mikew said:

Point to consider:

 

Our side must lose in order for our side to mount an appeal.

 

an appeal from who ever loses in the southern district seems likely at this point to get us to the 7th.
 

But to get from the 7th to SCOTUS would either require us to lose in the 7th,
or for Kwame and JB to not be content with a loss there.

 

Ezell and Shepard/Moore did not get appealed to SCOTUS.

 

I don't think this will go to SCOTUS unless our side loses (which I don't think we will). If this gets to SCOTUS it's an opportunity to invalidate every similar law on the books in other deep blue states. If Pritzker really does have his eyes on a POTUS run, it would hurt his chances and anger alot of other Governors.

[mauserme]

On 4/13/2023 at 11:43 AM, mikew said:

Point to consider:

 

Our side must lose in order for our side to mount an appeal.

 

an appeal from who ever loses in the southern district seems likely at this point to get us to the 7th.
 

But to get from the 7th to SCOTUS would either require us to lose in the 7th,
or for Kwame and JB to not be content with a loss there.

 

Ezell and Shepard/Moore did not get appealed to SCOTUS.

 

Continuing that reasoning, in Ezell and Shepard/Moore the state was afraid of precedent that would have applied nationwide had it gone to SCOTUS.  In a way, the precedent they feared back then has now been established with NYSRPA v Bruen.   They continue to hope for a change in the makeup of the court, and some believe Roberts and Kavanaugh won't go along with a compete reversal of a gun/magazine ban.  From their point of view they almost have nothing to lose.

 

 

 

 

[Euler]

On 4/13/2023 at 2:27 PM, Evil Porkchop said:

... If Pritzker really does have his eyes on a POTUS run, it would hurt his chances and anger alot of other Governors.

 

If this case goes to the US Supreme Court, it's not going to be decided before 2026, possibly 2028 or beyond. Pritzker has plenty of time to run.

[Euler]

In my inbox today, Pearson continues to call this case Harrell v Raoul. (That's the one ISRA is sponsoring.)

 

ISRA said:

... Our lawsuit, Harrel v Raoul, is a federal case and will apply not only to Illinois but to the entire United States if we make it to the Supreme Court of the United States. At this time, I do not see any reason we won't get there.

 

Yesterday was the long-awaited preliminary injunction hearing in our Harrel case and the three other consolidated cases in the Southern District of Illinois in East St. Louis. ...

[TargetCollector]

On 4/13/2023 at 1:50 PM, Euler said:

 

If this case goes to the US Supreme Court, it's not going to be decided before 2026, possibly 2028 or beyond. Pritzker has plenty of time to run.

 

For that reason and several others, I worry a little about the possible make-up of that court if and when this eventually reaches SCOTUS.  The current events surrounding Thomas have the left howling for his removal or court "reform" again, and we certainly won't get any favorable judges with the current administration in place.  I don't think we should count on getting a friendlier administration in 2024, either, all while Alito and Thomas sit as the two oldest justices on the bench.  On the plus side, these factors are reasons the state might press-on if they lose at the 7th, but they're also reasons we might not prevail in the end.  

 

There are a lot of steps between here and there, and I hope things play out favorably, but I'm also not going to be hoping we lose at the 7th just to be in the driver seat on whether this goes to SCOTUS.  

[fxdpntc]

I believe if the State loses at the 7th, there will be “encouragement” from powers at the national level, to walk away. This law is a turkey, and saner minds on that side probably realize it.

[Craigcr2]

I've never believed that any case from IL would win the race to SCOTUS for an AWB. There are several others out there that are more procedurally mature. My money is on Bianchi (MD) getting back to SCOTUS first. If I recall correctly the GVR was of a cert petition on the merits and SCOTUS is much more likely to want to hear a mature appeal than one on a motion for preliminary injunction. 

[Euler]

On 4/13/2023 at 4:14 PM, Craigcr2 said:

... SCOTUS is much more likely to want to hear a mature appeal than one on a motion for preliminary injunction. 

 

I don't think too many people expect a motion for preliminary injunction to make it to the Supreme Court. The case itself is what they think could.

[mikew]

On 4/13/2023 at 2:23 PM, Euler said:

In my inbox today, Pearson continues to call this case Harrell v Raoul. (That's the one ISRA is sponsoring.)

 

I can't blame him.  ISRA needs to self-toot whenever possible.

[mikew]

On 4/13/2023 at 3:03 PM, fxdpntc said:

I believe if the State loses at the 7th, there will be “encouragement” from powers at the national level, to walk away. This law is a turkey, and saner minds on that side probably realize it.

But there's JB's ego, as well as the inflated egos of every dem that touched or defended this.

[steveTA84]

On 4/13/2023 at 3:58 PM, mikew said:

I can't blame him.  ISRA needs to self-toot whenever possible.

Ain’t that the truth….

[Craigcr2]

On 4/13/2023 at 3:57 PM, Euler said:

 

I don't think too many people expect a motion for preliminary injunction to make it to the Supreme Court. The case itself is what they think could.

I don’t completely disagree and it would be interesting to see it happen, but I would be surprised if the court doesn’t rule on another challenge before an IL case is ripe. My expectation is that we will have binding precedent before this gets to the 7th on an appeal of a final judgement.