Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilsd.97723/gov.uscourts.ilsd.97723.1.0.pdf

 

 

Quote

Although the statute purports to be aimed at preventing firearms from being used in such a way that endangers public safety or health, HB 218 does not regulate the use (or misuse) of firearms. Nor does it impose liability on individuals who misuse firearms to the detriment of themselves or others.  Instead, HB 218 regulates selling, manufacturing, and advertising lawful (and constitutionally protected) firearms and related products. In other words, HB 218 regulates commerce in and speech relating to arms—even when that commerce and speech takes place entirely outside of Illinois, as will often be the case.  HB 218 also removes traditional elements of tort law that ensure that judges and juries do not impose liability on private parties for constitutionally protected conduct. Making matters worse, the statute jettisons traditional proximate cause in favor of allowing state courts to impose liability on licensed industry members for the actions of third-party criminals with whom the industry members never dealt.

 

Posted

Tuesday, United States Magistrate Judge Mark A. Beatty was randomly assigned to the case in the Southern Illinois federal court district. Beatty was appointed to the position in 2019 during the presidency of Donald Trump.

Posted
Most district cases are assigned to magistrates. They get assigned to judges when at least one party (or the judge) wants a judge instead of a magistrate. That part is no big deal.

That the judge is McGlynn is more interesting.
Posted
Upholder posted the CourtListener link above.

On August 14, 2023 at 03:00 PM, Upholder said:
The case was filed in the Federal District Court of Southern Illinois on August 14, 2023. (docket)
...

But if you really do mean the PACER link, that's here (requires login).
Posted
On 8/17/2023 at 9:00 PM, Tvandermyde said:

I love the Eastercrook reference but withhold that until he rules against us in the current case, he has a chance to redeem and check his ego

 

With the amount of arrogance and pompousness he shows, do you realistically think that is possible? 🙄

Posted
On 8/18/2023 at 10:14 PM, JTHunter said:

 

With the amount of arrogance and pompousness he shows, do you realistically think that is possible? 🙄

 

I've actually seen guys like that do a similar thing. The logic is that if someone is going to undo their work it's going to be them. 

Posted (edited)

 

Quote

NSSF v. Raoul (S.D. IL): Illinois is mad that the NSSF's lawsuit against the state's gun industry liability bill was assigned to the same judge that issued a preliminary injunction against its "assault weapon" and magazine bans, and has asked for a reassignment.

 

Here is the filing: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilsd.97723/gov.uscourts.ilsd.97723.13.0.pdf

Edited by Upholder
Posted
On 8/18/2023 at 10:14 PM, JTHunter said:

 

With the amount of arrogance and pompousness he shows, do you realistically think that is possible? 🙄

 

They're judges. They can be arrogant, but they have to work within a framework. They can't ignore Bruen. 

Posted
On 8/19/2023 at 12:01 PM, crufflesmuth said:

 

 They can't ignore Bruen. 

Of late quite a few of them seem to be doing a pretty good job of it…..

Posted
On 8/19/2023 at 3:37 PM, Tip said:

Of late quite a few of them seem to be doing a pretty good job of it…..

 

 

On 8/19/2023 at 3:37 PM, Tip said:

Of late quite a few of them seem to be doing a pretty good job of it…..

Because they are not being held accountable for doing so

Posted

In an ideal world, presuming I could read Easterbrook correctly: AR-15's are legal to own in Chicago and Cook County. Standard magazines even. No restrictions. Maybe an SBR. 

Maybe a suppressor. But no machine-guns. 

 

What judges like Easterbrook are realizing is that Bruen could be brought up against FOPA and challenge the 

registry ban. Perhaps even more. The progressives really are short-sighted.

 

Most people are happy with just semi-auto rifles and machine-guns banned. 

That's been status quo for sometime. 

Posted (edited)
On 8/19/2023 at 12:25 AM, davel501 said:

 

I've actually seen guys like that do a similar thing. The logic is that if someone is going to undo their work it's going to be them. 

 

Really?

 

eyebrow-raise-okay.gif

Edited by JTHunter
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 8 months later...
Posted
On June 7, the judge ordered the parties into mediation.

I've heard this song before in other cases. It isn't going to happen. One side wants the law enjoined. The other side wants to enforce it. There is no middle ground.
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)
On June 24, Raoul asked to file the Rahimi decision as an authority in support of the defendants in this case.

On June 25, the judge granted permission, subject to her review of its applicability.

Edited by Euler
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On July 8, based on a joint status report (which is not on the docket) all pending deadlines are stayed until the judge rules on outstanding motions, including a motion for a preliminary injunction.
Posted
On 7/8/2024 at 9:27 PM, Euler said:

On July 8, based on a joint status report (which is not on the docket) all pending deadlines are stayed until the judge rules on outstanding motions, including a motion for a preliminary injunction.

in English please?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...