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

[yurimodin]

On 11/9/2023 at 6:00 PM, Vern in IL said:

If the 1994AWB was legal nationally, how will ILAWB be not legal?  Sure there is Buren, but looking back, the national AWB was allowed...

keep in mind that had a built in 10 year sunset so it wasn't really worth fighting it vs waiting it out.

[mab22]

On 11/9/2023 at 6:00 PM, Vern in IL said:

I thought registering guns was a Nazi thing?  I guess it is cool to be a Democratic Nazi somehow?

Look at the 1994 AWB, the only thing Bush Jr. did right was to let that thing sunset.

If the 1994AWB was legal nationally, how will ILAWB be not legal?  Sure there is Buren, but looking back, the national AWB was allowed...

You spell Democrat wrong.

They would prefer to be called Democratic Party, it’s Democratick. 

[Flynn]

On 11/9/2023 at 6:00 PM, Vern in IL said:

If the 1994AWB was legal nationally, how will ILAWB be not legal?  Sure there is Buren, but looking back, the national AWB was allowed...

 

Because times change and court rulings change the landscape, you can't just dismiss how Heller/Bruen changed the 'gun' landscape any more than you can dismiss how Dobbs changed the 'abortion' landscape...

[springfield shooter]

Was the 1994 AWB ever challenged in court?

[Flynn]

On 11/9/2023 at 10:33 PM, springfield shooter said:

Was the 1994 AWB ever challenged in court?

 

Nope, at least it wasn't challenged directly on 2nd challenge, it was lightly challenged on the commerce clause and equal protection, but not the 2nd...

 

Prior to Heller the courts were unified in that the 2nd was a 2nd class right that the government could use basically any means end argument to infringe, Heller changed everything...

Edited November 10, 2023 at 04:46 AM by Flynn

[yurimodin]

On 11/9/2023 at 10:41 PM, Flynn said:

Prior to Heller the courts were unified in that the 2nd was a 2nd class right that the government could use basically any means end argument to infringe, Heller changed everything...

I remember reading an article a few years ago that Heller STILL cannot get a handgun in DC......so much for changing anything.

[MRE]

On 11/9/2023 at 10:41 PM, Flynn said:

 

Nope, at least it wasn't challenged directly on 2nd challenge, it was lightly challenged on the commerce clause and equal protection, but not the 2nd...

 

Prior to Heller the courts were unified in that the 2nd was a 2nd class right that the government could use basically any means end argument to infringe, Heller changed everything...

Essentially this. And then look at the dissent from when the Supremes denied Cert in the 2015 Friedman case, as well as lower court opinions from current Supremes on the issue, and that is why many believe these bans are ripe to be picked after Bruen. 

[Tvandermyde]

On 11/9/2023 at 3:22 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

I think a split is the right way to go at this time. 

 

The SCOTUS might take it up now with all that is going on - especially if they make it a point that Easterbrook is still using bad law and introducing a new military test, both of which go against the guidelines in Bruen and we have a jan 1st deadline to decide between our 2nd amendment rights and our 5th amendment rights. 

 

The ISRA should hammer that point.  

 

 

ISRA is going the route of the other 4 southern Illinois cases. And the Court won;t take Bevis if there is an active en banc petition pending. I don't want Bevis to be the lead case as I don't think it has the best fact pattern and I'm less than impressed by Herrea's pleadings as well. 

[Upholder]

Here is the FPC petition for the 7th Circuit to take up the case En Banc: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6708/attachments/original/1700262891/2023.11.17_141_En_Banc_Petition.pdf?1700262891

[Upholder]

Quote

II. This Case Is Exceptionally Important.
“Since Bruen, this is the first federal appellate court to uphold a categorical
ban on semiautomatic weapons and certain magazines.” Op.94 (Brennan, J.,
dissenting). That alone should give the full Court pause. In the year-plus since
Bruen, no other circuit has so aggressively stripped its citizens of the fundamental
right Bruen vindicated. It is also difficult to overstate the practical importance of
this case. Not only has Illinois banned virtually every modern rifle on the market,
but within a matter of weeks, HB5471 will turn millions of people into criminals
unless they get rid of their lawfully acquired (and constitutionally protected) arms
or register them en masse—something that fewer than 10,000 people have so far
proven willing or able to do. See Illinois State Police, Firearm Owner Identification
Card Statistics, https://isp.illinois.gov/Foid/Statistics (last visited Nov. 16, 2023).
When the stakes are this high, and the panel opinion this wrong, the path forward
should be clear.

 

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 11/20/2023 at 3:42 PM, Upholder said:

Here is the FPC petition for the 7th Circuit to take up the case En Banc: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6708/attachments/original/1700262891/2023.11.17_141_En_Banc_Petition.pdf?1700262891

 

That was solid. 

[Tvandermyde]

On 11/20/2023 at 1:42 PM, Upholder said:

Here is the FPC petition for the 7th Circuit to take up the case En Banc: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6708/attachments/original/1700262891/2023.11.17_141_En_Banc_Petition.pdf?1700262891

 

 

Actually, that is the En Banc motion from 3 of the 4 downstate cases. The lawyers worked together as did plaintiffs on how to pursue the path. we think once at least 1 other case figured out we were going en banc, it kinda nixed the SCOTUS route as SCOTUS would defer to the en banc petition and wait it's outcome. Some feel we are already past the point of being able to be considred this term/before the end of the year. So lets see what we can get en banc. 

 

Other factors are if the 4th does what we think it will do we have a split in the circuits. 

 

We also now have the FFL-IL, GOA, GSL case challenging the registration issue with a 2A challenge as well as vagueness etc. 

[ragsbo]

So what I am hearing is that there is NO WAY this crap gets shut down or thrown out before they can start locking folks up in January for not following their unconstitutional mandates. They get to drag their feet and keep screwing us over while playing ring around the rosie with every court they can find (especially those they have bought and paid for). Yeah, gotta rant a little.

[steveTA84]

On 11/22/2023 at 3:21 PM, ragsbo said:

So what I am hearing is that there is NO WAY this crap gets shut down or thrown out before they can start locking folks up in January for not following their unconstitutional mandates. They get to drag their feet and keep screwing us over while playing ring around the rosie with every court they can find (especially those they have bought and paid for). Yeah, gotta rant a little.

The politicians and activist gun grabbing  judges hate you. They want you jailed or killed if you don’t comply. But we are awaiting injunctions on vagueness and the registry out of McGlynn’s court, and McGylnn said he will have an order regarding the registry before 1/1/24

[MRE]

On 11/22/2023 at 3:21 PM, ragsbo said:

So what I am hearing is that there is NO WAY this crap gets shut down or thrown out before they can start locking folks up in January for not following their unconstitutional mandates. They get to drag their feet and keep screwing us over while playing ring around the rosie with every court they can find (especially those they have bought and paid for). Yeah, gotta rant a little.

That was at least part of the intent of Pritzker, Morgan, and Co. since the beginning.  They were well aware of the fact that a law like this was in direct contradiction to Bruen. They also knew the odds of it getting up to the Supremes before Jan 1, 2024 were slim. And they also knew that there was a good chance they would get a panel with Easterbrook (since he wrote the 2015 decision), that would ensure the 7th would slow it down. The Hail Mary throw on their end is that something happens to create a shift in the Supreme Court makeup by the time this issue does get a hearing there. That’s still TBD.

 

Having said all that, I do see a slight possibility that a Preliminary Injunction holds up at the 7th. Not due to its 2A questions, but mainly due to Pritzker and ISP dragging their feet too much with the rules, filing them so late and writing them in such a confusing manner that there’s no possible way the confusing and ambiguous Emergency rules will be fairly clarified, finalized, and permanently adopted by Jan 1. I think there’s a very good chance McGlynn issues an injunction before Jan 1, and a small chance, but not totally out of the realm of possibility, that the 7th let’s it stand at least until final rules are adopted. 

Edited November 24, 2023 at 02:42 PM by MRE

[Yas]

But they sure as heck stumbled over themselves passing it mighty dam quick.

[ragsbo]

The real problem is that IF/WHEN it does get shut down buy the courts, NOTHING will be done to those who passed/signed/tried to enforce this constitutional right violation. They will just do it all again and again, and again

[Vodoun da Vinci]

https://newillinoisstate.org/

 

Half kidding - half serious. Tired of this now.....

 

VooDoo