Caulkins v Prizker Case Discussion

[Flynn]

On 1/19/2024 at 4:42 PM, Molly B. said:

We know from history what our founding fathers did and it wasn't until the British came for the colonist stored ammunition.  This is not likely to happen in this day and age and with the U.S. Supreme Court NYSRPA v Bruen ruling. Let us pray it does not.

 

Sadly, I think that we are closer than we have been in 150 years to that powder keg going boom...

[davel501]

On 1/20/2024 at 2:55 AM, Flynn said:

 

Sadly, I think that we are closer than we have been in 150 years to that powder keg going boom...

 

I think Chevron getting struck down still save the country. No more wild swings of the pendulum every time there's a new administration. A favorable ruling against Chevron followed by a Trump administration where everything gets challenged and we're back to America before the courts stole all the power from the legislative branch and gave it to the executive. 

[Flynn]

On 1/20/2024 at 1:01 PM, davel501 said:

I think Chevron getting struck down still save the country.

 

Only if it's followed, you can bet that every alphabet agency will say it's not applicable to them until their case is actually litigated, or they will simply ignore with help of the lower courts like they do Heller/Bruen...  That pendulum is going to keep swinging with new administrations it's only a matter of how close it swings to lighting the fuse, we are truly a nation divided and that division is getting hardened further every day...

[skinnyb82]

On 1/20/2024 at 4:24 PM, Flynn said:

 

Only if it's followed, you can bet that every alphabet agency will say it's not applicable to them until their case is actually litigated

This is the most likely outcome. Think the administrative state will give up, lay down for SCOTUS? Nah. Same crap as Heller and Bruen. They will feign ignorance, knowing full well what they are doing. "We didn't know, we need more guidance." 

[davel501]

On 1/20/2024 at 4:24 PM, Flynn said:

 

Only if it's followed, you can bet that every alphabet agency will say it's not applicable to them until their case is actually litigated, or they will simply ignore with help of the lower courts like they do Heller/Bruen...  That pendulum is going to keep swinging with new administrations it's only a matter of how close it swings to lighting the fuse, we are truly a nation divided and that division is getting hardened further every day...

 

The leftists hate trump so much that they'll do the right thing for the country despite themselves. 

[Smallbore]

On 1/20/2024 at 4:48 PM, davel501 said:

 

The leftists hate trump so much that they'll do the right thing for the country despite themselves. 

The leftist are in a take all fight for their marxist tyranny. They know there is no victory with compromising leaving guns in the hands of us peasants.

[davel501]

On 1/20/2024 at 5:14 PM, Smallbore said:

The leftist are in a take all fight for their marxist tyranny. They know there is no victory with compromising leaving guns in the hands of us peasants.

 

You're thinking too small. This is all that social policy that they couldn't get enough votes for in Congress. 

[JTHunter]

On 1/19/2024 at 5:19 PM, yurimodin said:

True, I know I might seem eager but I really don't want it to happen. That said we can't go out with a whimper either. 

 

Nobody is ever "eager" for conflict, at least, not if they are in their "right mind".  More importantly is to be instantly ready (like the Minutemen) should the need arise.

Then fight like a mad dog to survive and be triumphant.

[steveTA84]

Looks like Caulkins is now building up a means to take it to the federal courts 

 

https://www.decaturtribune.com/2024/01/23/state-rep-dan-caulkins-petitions-illinois-supreme-court-to-vacate-decision-on-weapons-ban-law/

State Representative Dan Caulkins (R-Decatur) has today filed a post judgement petition with the Illinois Supreme Court to vacate its decision on the weapons ban law.

At issue is the denial of due process under the 14^th Amendment arising from Justices Elizabeth Rochford and Mary Kay O’Brien participating in the case despite overwhelming reasons they should have recused themselves. Both justices received disproportionate contributions from the leaders of the co-equal branches of government in the aggregate sum of more than $2.5 million in direct contributions and $7.3 million in indirect contributions calling into question their impartiality and independence. Both Justices reportedly committed to the outcome for an "assault weapon" ban during their respective campaigns joined by the Defendants which contributes to the denial of due process right to a fair hearing.

“The case has been filed and accepted by the Illinois Supreme Court,” Caulkins said. “It has been our contention all along that these two justices should have recused themselves. For this reason, we are asking the High Court to vacate its previous decision.”

[Upholder]

Surprising nobody, petition is denied:
 

 

[Euler]

This case is all the way dead. I think it can be unpinned.