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

[davel501]

On 9/3/2025 at 8:17 PM, steveTA84 said:

Yes, it’s a very good thing. Harmeet arguing herself.  She is RABIDLY pro-2A. This brings significant exposure (and pressure) to the case and the courts 

 

Let's hope it goes the way you say. I don't trust these people. 

[davel501]

On 9/3/2025 at 7:22 PM, mauserme said:

 

The amicus DOJ filed was firmly in support of the 2A.  It would be odd for them to argue against themselves.

 

 

 

It's the "mistakes" that I'm worried about. Saying the wrong thing opening the door to new arguments, etc. 

[ealcala31]

On 9/3/2025 at 10:23 PM, davel501 said:

 

It's the "mistakes" that I'm worried about. Saying the wrong thing opening the door to new arguments, etc. 

The one who is going to push for these 'mistakes' will be Easterbrook. To embarrass the Trump CRD/DOJ he'll be licking his chops. He tried to pound down hard how the federal government banned mgs, then Benbow corrected him and said the NFA did not ban mgs, they heavily regulated them. Easterbrook's fumble kind of gone unnoticed. I gave Benbow a thumbs up on a later email about that. 

[Tvandermyde]

On 9/3/2025 at 7:20 PM, Euler said:

It's more like no-cost mid-term PR. NSSF, FPC, and SAF are still the ones doing the heavy lifting.

 

 

To the contrary. I have been aware of this request for some time, but could not say anything. This was not brought about by those named entities, they just happen to be the quickest on the draw with their PR machines. 

[BeardswithoutOperators]

I think this is fantastic news. No blackpilling.

[steveTA84]

On 9/4/2025 at 10:16 PM, BeardswithoutOperators said:

I think this is fantastic news. No blackpilling.

This. Harmeet Dhillon will be the one arguing, not some 2nd rate DOJ lawyer. This is nothing but positive news

[steveTA84]

 

[mab22]

Gee! 5 whole minutes. 
Who thinks the judges will give 2 💩 about what she says and will go their own way? I don't think they will care myself.... 
I truly hope I am wrong and it makes a difference!
 

On 9/5/2025 at 12:58 PM, steveTA84 said:

 

 

 

[steveTA84]

On 9/5/2025 at 5:02 PM, mab22 said:

Gee! 5 whole minutes. 
Who thinks the judges will give 2 💩 about what she says and will go their own way? I don't think they will care myself.... 
I truly hope I am wrong and it makes a difference!
 

 

 

Each side gets 40 or 45 minutes to present. So she obviously didn’t want to take much away from the 2A lawyers, just arguing in their favor for a few minutes.  It’s massive and has never happened before and because of this, puts significant pressure on the 7th and signals they are also not ruling out getting involved at SCOTUS with this should the 7th be stupid and make an idiotic ruling 

[Tvandermyde]

Part of what this signals, is if (should read when) they get it wrong, the solicitor general is likely to ask the Court for cert and when the SG asks for cert, they usually get it

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 9/5/2025 at 5:16 PM, steveTA84 said:

Each side gets 40 or 45 minutes to present. So she obviously didn’t want to take much away from the 2A lawyers, just arguing in their favor for a few minutes.  It’s massive and has never happened before and because of this, puts significant pressure on the 7th and signals they are also not ruling out getting involved at SCOTUS with this should the 7th be stupid and make an idiotic ruling 

 

The 7th is going to rule in favor of the military test (and against us) for one simple reason.  If the military test is allowed to stand, it will allow a ban on virtually every single gun because pretty much every operating action has been used by the military at one point or another.  

 

It is a gamble by them worth taking because if they win, or SCOTUS refuses to take the case, everything will be on the ban table from here on out.  

[mab22]

On 9/5/2025 at 8:44 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

It is a gamble by them worth taking because if they win, or SCOTUS refuses to take the case, everything will be on the ban table from here on out.  

How about even simpler, what happens to the 7th if the get overruled by SCOTUS?

Smaller paychecks? No.

Loss of employment?No.

Loose their “district”? No.

Get a bad review that year and don’t get the bonus or guaranteed salary increase due to COLA?

NO.

Look at the 9th, or the NY Judge that fined President Donald J. Trump a half Billion. He was celebrated!
The left celebrates and praises them for taking a bold stance and 💩!

[springfield shooter]

On 9/5/2025 at 7:46 PM, Tvandermyde said:

Part of what this signals, is if (should read when) they get it wrong, the solicitor general is likely to ask the Court for cert and when the SG asks for cert, they usually get it

 

And admitting IANAL, one would guess that the Asst. AG will use her five minutes to get what the administration wants into the record. 

[mauserme]

Not exactly breaking since it's a couple days old, but still interesting.

 

 

[steveTA84]

 

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 9/6/2025 at 12:21 AM, mab22 said:

How about even simpler, what happens to the 7th if the get overruled by SCOTUS?

Smaller paychecks? No.

Loss of employment?No.

Loose their “district”? No.

Get a bad review that year and don’t get the bonus or guaranteed salary increase due to COLA?

NO.

Look at the 9th, or the NY Judge that fined President Donald J. Trump a half Billion. He was celebrated!
The left celebrates and praises them for taking a bold stance and 💩!

 

The way to combat liberal activists in the courts is with conservative activists in the courts.   The left incorporates their political ideology into everything. Our side needs to do the same. 

 

 

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 9/5/2025 at 5:02 PM, mab22 said:

Gee! 5 whole minutes. 
Who thinks the judges will give 2 💩 about what she says and will go their own way? I don't think they will care myself.... 
I truly hope I am wrong and it makes a difference!
 

 

 

 

I think a certain judge is likely to try to eat up those 5 minutes with grandstanding and gaslighting.  

 

I figured he was going to do it to our side anyway, but now with the AAG speaking, I bet he saves his blowhard nonsense for her.  

 

[ealcala31]

On 9/14/2025 at 12:13 AM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

Who thinks the judges will give 2 💩 about what she says and will go their own way? I don't think they will care myself....

I am echoing these thoughts...

 

On 9/14/2025 at 12:13 AM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

I think a certain judge is likely to try to eat up those 5 minutes with grandstanding and gaslighting.  

 

I figured he was going to do it to our side anyway, but now with the AAG speaking, I bet he saves his blowhard nonsense for her. 

I was thinking this is Taylor-made for Easterbrook. But, if she catches him on a good counter, what would his reaction be. Benbow caught him on a good counter when Easterbrook said mgs were banned in '34. Benbow countered with, (paraphrase) they were not banned, they were regulated until '86. Quick silence on Easterbrook's behalf. Nobody really caught it, disappointing. We'll need a good counter when he starts his grandstanding. Unfortunately, it will still mean nothing. This is a foregone conclusion. Easterbrook & St. Eve have chosen the gun control path. Let's prepare for a SCOTUS stand-off. This is the venue we stand a chance. District court decisions mean nothing if the 7th Circuit will Stay them b4 they are implemented, or we get another "Freedom Week" that is still being litigated while gun owners are staying in defacto "criminals status."

[John Q Public]

Theatrics, it's a done deal, frankly I find the posturing puerile grandstanding. 

[ealcala31]

On 9/14/2025 at 11:18 AM, John Q Public said:

Theatrics, it's a done deal, frankly I find the posturing puerile grandstanding. 

💯

[mauserme]

I think springfield shooter's post is on point.

 

 

On 9/6/2025 at 5:19 PM, springfield shooter said:

 

And admitting IANAL, one would guess that the Asst. AG will use her five minutes to get what the administration wants into the record. 

 

 

 

[stockboyy]

Judge ROY-easterbrook-BEAN will stay 
 his same path.

[stockboyy]

--Judge Frank Easterbrook--
 Illinois Chief Regulator of 2nd Amendment  Infringement

[yurimodin]

On 9/6/2025 at 12:21 AM, mab22 said:

How about even simpler, what happens to the 7th if the get overruled by SCOTUS?

Smaller paychecks? No.

Loss of employment?No.

Loose their “district”? No.

Get a bad review that year and don’t get the bonus or guaranteed salary increase due to COLA?

NO.

Look at the 9th, or the NY Judge that fined President Donald J. Trump a half Billion. He was celebrated!
The left celebrates and praises them for taking a bold stance and 💩!

 

Its long past time for some 1983 deprivation of civil liberties under color of law cases......and I don't give 2 poos about their viability. Its time for the lawfare to be in favor of the citizen for once.

[TomKoz]

On 9/15/2025 at 1:32 PM, yurimodin said:

 

Its long past time for some 1983 deprivation of civil liberties under color of law cases......and I don't give 2 poos about their viability. Its time for the lawfare to be in favor of the citizen for once.

Find a couple emails between leftist lawmakers where they say they know it’s unconstitutional and will probably get overturned … but let’s make it law for now anyway.

[Tango7]

On 9/15/2025 at 1:32 PM, yurimodin said:

 

Its long past time for some 1983 deprivation of civil liberties under color of law cases......and I don't give 2 poos about their viability. Its time for the lawfare to be in favor of the citizen for once.

Agreed. The taxpayer has been paying not only for the chains that bind us, but to keep us from breaking them for far too long.

[Tango7]

On 9/8/2025 at 10:11 PM, steveTA84 said:

 

 

 

So where's the challenge to the FOID using Murdock v Pennsylvania? Once the NCIC went active the claim of "weeding out prohibited persons" was moot.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 16, 2025 at 05:29 PM by Tango7

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

 

On 9/14/2025 at 11:11 AM, ealcala31 said:

 

 

 Easterbrook & St. Eve have chosen the gun control path. 

 

I thought some where hopeful about St. Eve because she was a Trump appointment.  She rule on something, or say something that tells us otherwise?  

[ealcala31]

On 9/17/2025 at 2:00 AM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

 

I thought some where hopeful about St. Eve because she was a Trump appointment.  She rule on something, or say something that tells us otherwise?  

Cook County AWB, IL PICA-voted on the Stay, IL Public Transit Ban (Schoenthal Case). All recent rulings...

[EdDinIL]

Monday's the hearing, right?  Will the hearing be streamed for all to hear, or at least all with a login somewhere?  Hopefully one of the pro-gun twitterers will be real-timing it, saving one of you from doing the same.