7th Circuit Court Ruling On Chicago Gun Ban

novus collectus · Nov 7, 2008

Does anyone have any idea how soon the Chicago and San Fransisco gun ban lawsuits may be before it gets to the Supreme Court?
I am worried Scalia might croak before it gets there and the next decision could either be a tie while waiting for the appointment of a new judge, or Obama appoints someone to his seat.

R2.0 · Nov 7, 2008

Honestly, I don't think it will get to the Supremes. What district court, much less appelate court, is going to read Heller and decide that the 14th amendment doesn't apply? Aside from the 9th, that is?

novus collectus · Nov 7, 2008

R2.0 said:
Honestly, I don't think it will get to the Supremes. What district court, much less appelate court, is going to read Heller and decide that the 14th amendment doesn't apply? Aside from the 9th, that is?

Then how long before it possibly gets to the SC denies Cert.?

LowRecoil · Nov 7, 2008

Have they petitioned for cert yet? If so, there is no way to tell. They get around to it when they decide to. If not, where are the cases currently? Sorry, haven't been following them.

ezliving · Nov 7, 2008

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

We’ve been advised that the Court would prefer ruling on the Second Amendment incorporation issue not within the context of a summary judgment motion, but as presented in a Rule 16 motion to narrow the issues in the case.

On Tuesday, October 21, we obliged the Court and filed just such a motion.
http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/motionnarrowlegalissues.pdf

Stay tuned….

San Fran Ban: http://www.stopsanfranban.com/

novus collectus · Nov 7, 2008

LowRecoil said:
Have they petitioned for cert yet? If so, there is no way to tell. They get around to it when they decide to. If not, where are the cases currently? Sorry, haven't been following them.

I am not even sure they have even had one day in court yet. I would love to find a link with updates.

.....just found it

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

We’ve been advised that the Court would prefer ruling on the Second Amendment incorporation issue not within the context of a summary judgment motion, but as presented in a Rule 16 motion to narrow the issues in the case.

On Tuesday, October 21, we obliged the Court and filed just such a motion.

novus collectus · Nov 7, 2008

ezliving said:
http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

San Fran Ban: http://www.stopsanfranban.com/

You were quicker than me. :thumbsup:

LowRecoil · Nov 7, 2008

I dont have rule 16 memorized. I'll have to look it up.

ezliving · Dec 6, 2008

ezliving said:
http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

<<<<< UPDATE >>>>>

Dec 06 2008
Moving Forward
Published by Alan Gura

In October, shortly after we filed our Rule 16 motion (see Oct. 24 post below), the NRA filed similar motions in their companion case challenging Chicago’s handgun ban, as well as its case challenging Oak Park’s handgun ban. Although our cases do not perfectly overlap, the goal of all three Rule 16 motions in each case was the same: to seek an opinion from the Court that, as a matter of law, state and local governments are bound by the Second Amendment.

On Thursday, the District Court issued an opinion and order in the NRA cases, denying the motions. A similar opinion and order, adopting the Court’s rationale in the NRA cases, was entered in our case. The District Court ruled, essentially, that whatever the merits of our claims, it is bound by existing precedent holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to state and local governments. The order in our case denied not only our Rule 16 motion, but also our previously unresolved motion for summary judgment. A hearing is set in all three cases for December 9, to see where the matters now stand.

Although we would have preferred that the Court had ruled in our favor, we are not disappointed. From Day One, it was clear that this case would be decided conclusively on appeal. This development takes us one step closer toward the elimination of Chicago’s failed and unconstitutional gun ban, and for that, we are grateful.

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

<<<<< CASES >>>>>

NRA v. Village of Oak Park decision: http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/dist_ct_nra_opinion.pdf

McDonald v. Chicago decision: http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/dist_ct_mcdonald_opinion.pdf

McDonald v. Chicago appeal: http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/notice_filed.pdf

novus collectus · Dec 6, 2008

Damn, more waiting.

ezliving · Dec 6, 2008

The District Court Judge pitched the perfect ball for an out-of-the-park Home Run in the Court of Appeals.

R2.0 · Dec 6, 2008

To which precedents was the court referring when it said that the states were not bound by the 2A?

novus collectus · Dec 6, 2008

R2.0 said:
To which precedents was the court referring when it said that the states were not bound by the 2A?

If you read the Heller decision, I think they were alluded too, but they were rulings dealing with the collective or militia aspect IIRC. The individual right aspect has not been ruled on yet as I think I understand it.

ezliving · Dec 6, 2008

R2.0 said:
To which precedents was the court referring when it said that the states were not bound by the 2A?

Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove, 695 F.2d 261 (7th Cir. 1982)

It's all spelled out in the decisions.

novus collectus · Dec 6, 2008

ezliving said:
The District Court Judge pitched the perfect ball for an out-of-the-park Home Run in the Court of Appeals.

What do you mean, that it is going straight for them and to make an easy decision on in our favor, or against us?

ezliving · Dec 6, 2008

novus collectus said:
What do you mean, that it is going straight for them and to make an easy decision on in our favor, or against us?

I read the decision as a perfect setup to overturn Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove in the Court of Appeals.

It has to happen in the Court of Appeals, not the District Court. The Distict Court shouldn't have tried to overturn a higher court.

I think District Court Judge Shadur did us a favor. Judge Shadur asked for the perfect case that he knew he had to decide against in order to set up the appeal for a slam-dunk.

novus collectus · Dec 6, 2008

ezliving said:
I read the decision as a perfect setup to overturn Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove in the Court of Appeals.

It has to happen in the Court of Appeals, not the District Court. The Distict Court shouldn't have tried to overturn a higher court.

I think District Court Judge Shadur did us a favor. Judge Shadur asked for the perfect case that he knew he had to decide against in order to set up the appeal for a slam-dunk.

ezliving · Jan 29, 2009

Jan 28 2009
Opening Appellate Brief Filed

Published by Alan Gura under Uncategorized

Today we filed our opening brief in the Court of Appeals. The basic arguments may be familiar to those who have followed the proceedings below, but we had somewhat more room to work with at this stage, not to mention the decision below required a response.

All three remaining Chicago-area cases, ours and the two brought by the NRA against Chicago and Oak Park, have been consolidated on appeal.

That means that they will be heard and decided together by the same panel, and the parties on both sides are to minimize the degree of overlapping arguments among them. We’ll post the other briefs on this website (the NRA’s, the Cities’, and amicis’) as they come in.

In a week, we expect the amici supporting us to file their briefs. Chicago and Oak Park turn in their efforts in thirty days, followed by their amici in a week. We then get a reply two weeks later. The case will most likely be argued, and perhaps even decided by the Court of Appeals, sometime this year.

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/appellants_brief_074244final.pdf

http://www.chicagoguncase.com/

ezliving · Jan 29, 2009

Elegant. The Appellate Brief filed in the Chicago Gun Case by Alan Gura is perfect elegance.

Chicago's gun laws are toast. Count the days....

I wish Alan Gura would turn his attention to the unconstitutionality of Maryland gun laws.

boricuamaximus · Jan 29, 2009

Be nice if Maryland would listen but we're Maryland. We're like Exxon.

Liberal Hippie Bumper sticker quote that I saw on 270 the other day:

Care? We dont have to care. We're Exxon, we are the problem!"

7th Circuit Court Ruling On Chicago Gun Ban

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Banned

Ultimate Member

Banned

Federalist

Besieger

Banned

Banned

Federalist

Besieger

Banned

Besieger

Ultimate Member

Banned

Besieger

Banned

Besieger

Banned

Besieger

Besieger

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics