Upholder Posted August 31, 2023 at 02:50 PM Share Posted August 31, 2023 at 02:50 PM Docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67647542/myers-v-kelly/ This case was brought in state court by Thomas Maag and was transferred to the Southern District of Illinois Federal District court. It challenges the FOID. So far, in federal court, the state has been granted two Extensions of Time to File Answer motions, one on July 28, 2023 and one on Aug 28, 2023. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted August 31, 2023 at 07:04 PM Share Posted August 31, 2023 at 07:04 PM Oh boy LOFL! https://civilrights.org/resource/oppose-the-confirmation-of-david-dugan-to-the-u-s-district-court-for-the-southern-district-of-illinois/ and not one word about recusal, anti-gunners. You lost that right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTHunter Posted September 1, 2023 at 04:13 AM Share Posted September 1, 2023 at 04:13 AM On 8/31/2023 at 2:04 PM, steveTA84 said: Oh boy LOFL! https://civilrights.org/resource/oppose-the-confirmation-of-david-dugan-to-the-u-s-district-court-for-the-southern-district-of-illinois/ and not one word about recusal, anti-gunners. You lost that right. Amen to that !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RECarry Posted September 1, 2023 at 12:36 PM Share Posted September 1, 2023 at 12:36 PM LOL 😁 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTriple Posted September 7, 2023 at 05:08 PM Share Posted September 7, 2023 at 05:08 PM Excellent news! Federal court was always the right avenue! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaKoncepts aka CGS Posted September 8, 2023 at 02:13 PM Share Posted September 8, 2023 at 02:13 PM On 8/31/2023 at 2:04 PM, steveTA84 said: Oh boy LOFL! https://civilrights.org/resource/oppose-the-confirmation-of-david-dugan-to-the-u-s-district-court-for-the-southern-district-of-illinois/ and not one word about recusal, anti-gunners. You lost that right It is interesting how a web site titled "civilrights.org" talks about gun control as being common sense. One would think a group fighting for civil rights would support groups fighting against taking away our rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted September 8, 2023 at 02:54 PM Share Posted September 8, 2023 at 02:54 PM ^^^ lefty activist groups only like some of the bill of rights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upholder Posted September 8, 2023 at 07:43 PM Author Share Posted September 8, 2023 at 07:43 PM Case in point is how the ACLU counts to 10: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skolnick Posted September 8, 2023 at 07:59 PM Share Posted September 8, 2023 at 07:59 PM On 9/8/2023 at 2:43 PM, Upholder said: Case in point is how the ACLU counts to 10: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. They are not too fond of 9 and 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted September 13, 2023 at 10:57 PM Share Posted September 13, 2023 at 10:57 PM On August 31, 2023 at 09:50 AM, Upholder said:→... This case was brought in state court by Thomas Maag and was transferred to the Southern District of Illinois Federal District court. ... The state had it removed to federal court on July 24. On September 12, plaintiffs moved to have the case remanded back to state court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted September 13, 2023 at 11:21 PM Share Posted September 13, 2023 at 11:21 PM On 9/13/2023 at 5:57 PM, Euler said: The state had it removed to federal court on July 24. On September 12, plaintiffs moved to have the case remanded back to state court. Why would you move it back to a state court in Illinois? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted September 13, 2023 at 11:38 PM Share Posted September 13, 2023 at 11:38 PM Is Maag retarded or something? Wth?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted September 14, 2023 at 12:04 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 12:04 AM If you read the federal docket, you can see that Maag has not been cooperating with court procedures at all up to now, despite threats of sanctions from the judge. Apparently Maag really doesn't want to be there. Maybe that was his strategy to get the case kicked out of federal court all along. I'm speculating. My psychic powers have failed on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted September 14, 2023 at 12:22 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 12:22 AM The ONLY thing that comes to mind is a judge Easter crook slipping in and messing around. But I would think you would get a fair shake in a federal court as opposed to an Illinois state court with a corrupt Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:22 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:22 AM On 9/13/2023 at 7:04 PM, Euler said: If you read the federal docket, you can see that Maag has not been cooperating with court procedures at all up to now, despite threats of sanctions from the judge. Apparently Maag really doesn't want to be there. Maybe that was his strategy to get the case kicked out of federal court all along. I'm speculating. My psychic powers have failed on this one. Why? He has a judge who appears to understand the 2A. What the heck is going back to state court going to do?!?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:29 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:29 AM On 9/13/2023 at 8:22 PM, steveTA84 said: Why? He has a judge who appears to understand the 2A. What the heck is going back to state court going to do?!?!?!? Pull a Caulkins!? HA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:30 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:30 AM LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTriple Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:41 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 01:41 AM Yeah, there's no reason to move it back. As I've said before, any FOID case has to go through the federal courts, so I don't understand the strategy here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted September 14, 2023 at 02:44 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 02:44 AM (edited) I decided to read the original complaint. Maybe it has some clues. Complaint said:... Count I [which the complaint calls Count II] 1. ... Plaintiff ... is a citizen and resident of ... Illinois.... 6. ... Plaintiff applied for a [FOID], which was denied on May 12, 2023, on the basis that 430 ILCS 65/8(n) prohibits issuing a FOID card to a person prohibited by any Illinois state statute or federal law ..., and that there is some allegedly relevant disqualification from South Carolina from 2017.... 8. ... the South Carolina matter refers to a non-violent drug conviction. 9. ... [Range v Garland, US Court of Appeals for the 3rd Cicuit, en banc (2023)]... WHEREFORE ... (1) ordering Defendant to issue Plaintiff a fully valid FOID card, (2) declaring 430 ILCS 65/8 unconstitutional, as applied to Plaintiff, ... Count II [which the complaint also calls Count II]... 5. ... the Illinois legislature and the governor of Illinois passed and enacted ... 735 ILCS 5/2-101.5 ... 6. That the purported statute purports to limit access to the Court by the citizens of Illinois ...... WHEREFORE ... declare 735 ILCS 5/2-101.5 unconstitutional and (1) deny any change of venue motion based upon 735 ILCS 5/2-101.5, (2) to enjoin Defendant Kelly ... from challenging the venue ... based on 735 ILCS 5/2-101.5 ... So it's half a 2A civil case and half a 1A civil case. When the complaint says it wants those laws declared unconstitutional and Maag wants the case in Illinois state courts, that means he wants those laws declared unconstitutional by the Illinois state constitution. Also he wants the state courts to follow a Federal precedent from CA3 for the FOID challenge part. Hmm... Edited September 14, 2023 at 02:48 AM by Euler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davel501 Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:00 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:00 AM Can't be appeal a bad ruling from the Illinois Supreme Court directly to scotus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:30 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:30 AM State supreme court decisions can be petitioned to the US Supreme Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davel501 Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:38 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:38 AM That's what he wants - a garbage opinion from a documented corrupt court that he can get smacked down by scotus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:48 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 03:48 AM On 9/13/2023 at 10:38 PM, davel501 said: That's what he wants - a garbage opinion from a documented corrupt court that he can get smacked down by scotus. With all the new info out, wish Jerry Stocks would make that move…. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted September 14, 2023 at 04:17 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 04:17 AM (edited) If Maag presents a weak case and further sabotages it to insure he loses at the state level, the US Supreme Court is extremely unlikely to grant a petition for certiorari. Edited September 14, 2023 at 04:17 AM by Euler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTriple Posted September 14, 2023 at 04:20 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 04:20 AM On 9/13/2023 at 10:38 PM, davel501 said: That's what he wants - a garbage opinion from a documented corrupt court that he can get smacked down by scotus. The problem is the State Supreme Court may do what they did in the Brown case, which was to completely ignore the Second Amendment question and find another reason to rule against the plaintiff, creating a body of bad case law that SCOTUS wouldn't be inclined to take. It would be better to stay in federal court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davel501 Posted September 14, 2023 at 04:29 AM Share Posted September 14, 2023 at 04:29 AM On 9/13/2023 at 11:17 PM, Euler said: If Maag presents a weak case and further sabotages it to insure he loses at the state level, the US Supreme Court is extremely unlikely to grant a petition for certiorari. You ever have a good idea but the execution gets messy but you love the idea so much that you try to power through? That could be what we're seeing. I hope it ends up working out but I wonder if he'd be better off stepping back and reevaluating the situation as it is rather than how he thought it could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTriple Posted September 20, 2023 at 01:49 PM Share Posted September 20, 2023 at 01:49 PM Any updates on this? I really don't understand why Maag wants it moved back to state court. I'm hoping the federal judge tells him to pound sand. Which, ironically, would actually benefit Maag (and the rest of us, too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted October 11, 2023 at 01:56 AM Share Posted October 11, 2023 at 01:56 AM On September 27, the judge set the following schedule. 10/25: joint status report due 11/01: scheduling conference 11/07: final pretrial conference 11/18: bench trial Presumably the judge will rule on 11/01 or 11/07 on Maag's motion to remand the case back to the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted October 11, 2023 at 06:45 PM Share Posted October 11, 2023 at 06:45 PM On 10/10/2023 at 8:56 PM, Euler said: On September 27, the judge set the following schedule. 10/25: joint status report due 11/01: scheduling conference 11/07: final pretrial conference 11/18: bench trial Presumably the judge will rule on 11/01 or 11/07 on Maag's motion to remand the case back to the state. So they will get this started on 11/18 if it doesn’t go back to the state? Usually this cr@p drags on for months…. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted October 11, 2023 at 10:42 PM Share Posted October 11, 2023 at 10:42 PM I don't think there are any facts in dispute, so there's no need for discovery or a jury. That speeds things up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now