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

[crufflesmuth]

It's not a question of winning or losing Easterbrook. The 7th Circuit has ruled favorably in the past for second amendment rights.

 

AR-15's and the like are facing the same set of obstacles handguns did Pre-Heller. Because SCOTUS never went beyond

discussion of "quintessential" self-defense weapons, circuit courts have largely been relegated to addressing the 

issue on their own. Assuming they read things verbatim. 

 

The more I reflect on Easterbrook and Diane's writing, the more I can see their confusion and ignorance 

of cases like Staples v. United States. Either they do not want to acknowledge explicit intent in 

the mere possession of a semi-automatic AR-15 - they do not want to acknowledge a person

needs to actually go through the process of machining and other technicalities to have a "rapid"

fire weapon or they truly believe there are no physical differences let alone legal ones - between

a machine-gun manufactured by an SOT and your standard AR-15 which has not been made

by an SOT.

 

On technicality, I guess Easterbrook is right: the receiver of an AR-15 and M16 are cosmetically

the same in appearance. That is about it. You cannot ignore the legal 

manufactured differences - including tolerances and grades of aluminum which distinguish

a full-auto rated barrel compared to a semi-automatic one. 

 

With Easterbrook's logic, AR-15's should have their own specific bolt carriers 

and not have cross compatibility with M16 "full" auto ones that actually do not function 

that way. 

 

Dangerous and unusual? Hard to say. If they are, why are other classes

of people and agencies exempt? Why have CPD, ISP, CCSD and 

various private security companies not filed an OSHA complaint?

 

 

 

Edited November 8, 2024 at 04:02 PM by crufflesmuth

[SiliconSorcerer]

Using that logic a Glock should be illegal since it IS identical as one with a $5 switch. 

 

[EdDinIL]

On 11/8/2024 at 10:02 AM, SiliconSorcerer said:

Using that logic a Glock should be illegal since it IS identical as one with a $5 switch. 

 

That's the next target for gun grabbers, but that's also for a different discussion for when SCOTUS gets around to reviewing it in 2029 or so.

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 11/8/2024 at 9:55 AM, crufflesmuth said:

It's not a question of winning or losing Easterbrook. The 7th Circuit has ruled favorably in the past for second amendment rights.

 

AR-15's and the like are facing the same set of obstacles handguns did Pre-Heller. Because SCOTUS never went beyond

discussion of "quintessential" self-defense weapons, circuit courts have largely been relegated to addressing the 

issue on their own. Assuming they read things verbatim. 

 

The more I reflect on Easterbrook and Diane's writing, the more I can see their confusion and ignorance 

of cases like Staples v. United States. Either they do not want to acknowledge explicit intent in 

the mere possession of a semi-automatic AR-15 - they do not want to acknowledge a person

needs to actually go through the process of machining and other technicalities to have a "rapid"

fire weapon or they truly believe there are no physical differences let alone legal ones - between

a machine-gun manufactured by an SOT and your standard AR-15 which has not been made

by an SOT.

 

On technicality, I guess Easterbrook is right: the receiver of an AR-15 and M16 are cosmetically

the same in appearance. That is about it. You cannot ignore the legal 

manufactured differences - including tolerances and grades of aluminum which distinguish

a full-auto rated barrel compared to a semi-automatic one. 

 

With Easterbrook's logic, AR-15's should have their own specific bolt carriers 

and not have cross compatibility with M16 "full" auto ones that actually do not function 

that way. 

 

Dangerous and unusual? Hard to say. If they are, why are other classes

of people and agencies exempt? Why have CPD, ISP, CCSD and 

various private security companies not filed an OSHA complaint?

 

 

 

 

I think the Bruen decision was perfectly clear.  I don't believe those judges are ignorant or confused.  They go out of their way, to get around Bruen by inventing their own test, and the supreme court specifically laid out what was to be used, and that anything else was now bad law. 

 

[EdDinIL]

 

 

Edited November 8, 2024 at 09:04 PM by EdDinIL
Fixed the PEBKAC that kept the tweet from embedding

[solareclipse2]

So...AR-15's, 30 round rifle mags, and 20 round pistol mags are all legal again? 

[Silhouette]

Here is a link to the decision:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilsd.94464/gov.uscourts.ilsd.94464.258.0.pdf

 

[Matt B]

Stayed for 30 days so no freedom weekend.

[solareclipse2]

So in those 30 days the order is stayed, how will the state be able to jerk us around aside from asking for an extended stay?

[Molly B.]

A huge win for the Second Amendment in Illinois!!

 

McGLenn Ruling gov.uscourts.ilsd.94464.258.0.pdf

[EdDinIL]

 

On 11/8/2024 at 2:52 PM, solareclipse2 said:

So in those 30 days the order is stayed, how will the state be able to jerk us around aside from asking for an extended stay?

 

Appeal to 7CA on Day 2928, get the order stayed until the appeals process plays out, presumably with ACB still not doing anything substantive at SCOTUS.

 

Edit: Day 29 would be a Saturday, so day 28.

Edited November 8, 2024 at 08:57 PM by EdDinIL

[Grub]

Great decision, it's a win but the stay is disappointing. I guess my credit card will thank me later.

[yurimodin]

On 11/8/2024 at 2:39 PM, solareclipse2 said:

So...AR-15's, 30 round rifle mags, and 20 round pistol mags are all legal again? 

no because he stayed it for no reason.

 

 

On 11/8/2024 at 10:02 AM, SiliconSorcerer said:

Using that logic a Glock should be illegal since it IS identical as one with a $5 switch. 

 

Full auto is also protected by the 2A but is being infringed right now as well.

[solareclipse2]

On 11/8/2024 at 3:07 PM, yurimodin said:

no because he stayed it for no reason.

 

 

Yeah...why do that?

[ITguy1686]

Tom Devore just reported that the Federal Court ruled the AWB unconsitutional!!!!!!!

[ITguy1686]

[Monty80]

On 11/8/2024 at 3:11 PM, solareclipse2 said:

 

Yeah...why do that?

I'm guessing he stayed it so people don't buy a bunch of toys and then end up having them sit at their dealers for a couple of years. 

[davel501]

On 11/8/2024 at 1:12 PM, ITguy1686 said:

Tom Devore just reported that the Federal Court ruled the AWB unconsitutional!!!!!!!

Guess it's official now. 

[Molly B.]

This is good: "Therefore, this Court holds that the operative provisions of PICA cannot be severed
from the whole and must be stricken in the entirety."

[steveTA84]

Yawn. The 30 day stay ensures this law is going nowhere until SCOTUS rules, which could be years. Hey, at least we got Trump to appoint more judges though over the next 4 years and that can help in other places to speed this garbage along 

[Molly B.]

On 11/8/2024 at 3:40 PM, steveTA84 said:

Yawn. The 30 day stay ensures this law is going nowhere until SCOTUS rules, which could be years. Hey, at least we got Trump to appoint more judges though over the next 4 years and that can help in other places to speed this garbage along 

Maybe we'll get a good panel to rule on the appeal.  Mark Smith at Four Boxes Diner thinks that might be possible with Judge Wood's retirement . . .

[EdDinIL]

Four Boxes Diner doesn't have a video up yet, but here's Guns & Gadgets take on it.

 

 

[mikew]

I am not a lawyer, but my reading the opinion at the end of the decision sounds like only one aspect of the combined case is stayed for 30 days.

Or does the stay apply to the whole thing?

 

For the reasons set forth above, the Government’s Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment on the Langley Plaintiffs’ Counts IV and VI (Doc. 220) is GRANTED.

Most importantly, considering all of the evidence presented, the Court holds
that the provisions of PICA criminalizing the knowing possession of specific
semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, magazines, and attachments are unconstitutional
under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the
states by the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ request for a
permanent injunction is GRANTED. The State of Illinois is hereby ENJOINED
from the enforcement of PICA’s criminal penalties in accordance with 720 ILL. COMP.
STAT. §§ 5/24-1(a)(14)–(16) (bump stocks and assault weapons); 5/24-1.9(a)–(h)
(assault weapons and attachments); and 5/24-1.10(a)–(h) (large-capacity magazines)
against all Illinois citizens, effective immediately. As the prohibition of firearms is
unconstitutional, so is the registration scheme for assault weapons, attachments, and
large-capacity magazines. Therefore, the State of Illinois is ENJOINED from
enforcing the firearm registration requirements and penalties associated with
entering false information on the endorsement affidavit for non-exempt weapons,
magazines, and attachments previously required to be registered in accordance with
430 ILL. COMP. STAT. 65/4.1. This permanent injunction is STAYED for thirty (30)
days. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

 

 

[2A4Cook]

The stay is to give them a chance to file an appeal, at which point they'll file an emergency motion to stay the PI pending the outcome of the appeal, which they'll drag out for a least a year.  No chance CA 7 denies a stay pending appeal.  I'm sick of these criminal activist Democrat "judges" and Keesterbrooke. 

[MrTriple]

Good to hear! I also find the concise but firm language refreshing.

[Dave D]

50 cal and belt feds do not apply to this ruling either...So IL will just ban those.

[Maxon Shooters]

State has filed its appeal.

-dan e

[BeardswithoutOperators]

https://youtu.be/dKGjgRrYexg?si=A8zSW00Lx_qCT_Y2

[steveTA84]

On 11/8/2024 at 3:47 PM, Molly B. said:

Maybe we'll get a good panel to rule on the appeal.  Mark Smith at Four Boxes Diner thinks that might be possible with Judge Wood's retirement . . .

Yeah good point. I’m not optimistic on that, but hopefully I’m wrong 

[Molly B.]

On 11/8/2024 at 5:15 PM, Maxon Shooters said:

State has filed its appeal.

-dan e

Just like clock work! Wouldn't have expected anything else from them.  They can't seem to keep themselves from infringing on the rights of others.  Our day is coming though.