Illinois slapped down about FOID card

fishcrow · Apr 28, 2021

https://foxbaltimore.com/news/nation-world/illinois-judge-rules-foid-card-unconstitutional

Judge said citizens born with right, not to be blessed by the state.

Mr H · Apr 28, 2021

Interesting... and a step forward.

My question, though, is how she came to own the firearm, and when. Under my understanding of the FOID regime, this could only be possible if she owned it before moving into the state??

Melnic · Apr 28, 2021

Will this affect striking down the MD HQL?

Trepang · Apr 28, 2021

I am originally from Illinois and most of my family still lives in Southern Illinois.

You need(ed) a FOID card to buy a tube of BBs at Rural King.

Sirex · Apr 28, 2021

Thats good, because I have no doubt MD would eventually go that route, especially after doing the HQL thing.

Ponder_MD · Apr 28, 2021

Yaaasss. Someone here posted a photo of their dad's FOID card. I'd never heard of such a thing and thought "that's some fascist $hit." I'm glad to hear that it may be coming to an end.

Trepang · Apr 28, 2021

Back in February I went back to see my Dad in Southern Illinois.

A small gun shop in Pana, IL had eight Garands, three 1903A3, and two 1903s. All CMP Rack, Field and Service grade. $900 - $1300.

In addition to the cool old guns they had several ARs between $800-$1000.

Without a FOID, they wouldn't even talk to me about selling me one.

Occam · Apr 28, 2021

Melnic said:
Will this affect striking down the MD HQL?

Not without Illinois appealing the decision and having it chased up through federal court, circuit court, and eventually to SCOTUS (since we're not in the same circuit as IL). And that presumes that IL would take the time and effort to appeal it all that way, which I seriously doubt.

Now, does it help MSI's counter-HQL efforts to be able to point to this very related ruling in another state as they work it here in Maryland? Can't hurt. But as it sits, this ruling in IL doesn't make anything happen in MD.

Trepang · Apr 28, 2021

Ponder_MD said:
Yaaasss. Someone here posted a photo of their dad's FOID card. I'd never heard of such a thing and thought "that's some fascist $hit." I'm glad to hear that it may be coming to an end.

That was me. Dad's actual FOID "card" is expired but he has a letter from the Illinois State Police extending it's expiration date because they are behind in issuing new cards due to COVID.

The problem is, most shops will not honor that letter.

TheBert · Apr 28, 2021

Occam said:
Not without Illinois appealing the decision and having it chased up through federal court, circuit court, and eventually to SCOTUS (since we're not in the same circuit as IL). And that presumes that IL would take the time and effort to appeal it all that way, which I seriously doubt.

Now, does it help MSI's counter-HQL efforts to be able to point to this very related ruling in another state as they work it here in Maryland? Can't hurt. But as it sits, this ruling in IL doesn't make anything happen in MD.

This is what torques me about the Federal Circuit system. Why are the laws between the several federal circuits different? Why is an FOID that is ruled as unconstitutional in one circuit not unconstitutional in another circuit.

teratos · Apr 28, 2021

Frosh scoffs
Atterbeary doesn't feel fresh
O'Malley is nowhere to be found

krucam · Apr 28, 2021

Here's the IL Circuit Court Opinion:
https://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=30024

XCheckR · Apr 28, 2021

TheBert said:
This is what torques me about the Federal Circuit system. Why are the laws between the several federal circuits different? Why is an FOID that is ruled as unconstitutional in one circuit not unconstitutional in another circuit.

Isn't that where the SCoUS should step in.

teratos · Apr 28, 2021

krucam said:
Here's the IL Circuit Court Opinion:
https://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=30024

Good read. Thanks.

randomuser · Apr 28, 2021

XCheckR said:
Isn't that where the SCoUS should step in.

You could have posted this in the joke thread.

Occam · Apr 28, 2021

XCheckR said:
Isn't that where the SCoUS should step in.

The Supreme Court doesn't step in. NO court "steps in." Somebody has to bring a case to them, has to show standing, and has to convince them the case is appropriate for that venue and that they should weigh in. Thousands and thousands of cases are routinely waved off by SCOTUS without another glance. They (the court) don't have a constitutional mechanism by which to read the news in the morning and say to themselves, "Well, THAT doesn't sound right - let's step in!"

Which isn't to say that they don't sometimes rule on cases that should be left alone, and certainly that they don't ignore cases they should take. But they can only ignore or act on things that are brought to them through the normal food chain of circumstances, lower court rulings, etc.

jcutonilli · Apr 28, 2021

Melnic said:
Will this affect striking down the MD HQL?

Occam said:
Not without Illinois appealing the decision and having it chased up through federal court, circuit court, and eventually to SCOTUS (since we're not in the same circuit as IL). And that presumes that IL would take the time and effort to appeal it all that way, which I seriously doubt.

Now, does it help MSI's counter-HQL efforts to be able to point to this very related ruling in another state as they work it here in Maryland? Can't hurt. But as it sits, this ruling in IL doesn't make anything happen in MD.

This is a state court issue. It was in the IL Circuit Court, which is the lowest level court in IL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Illinois This is also an as-applied challenge which means it only applies to the defendant. The ruling does not even apply to others in IL.

Occam · Apr 28, 2021

jcutonilli said:
This is a state court issue. It was in the IL Circuit Court, which is the lowest level court in IL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Illinois This is also an as-applied challenge which means it only applies to the defendant. The ruling does not even apply to others in IL.

Now, would the state appealing that ruling (in the interests of further making miserable the woman in question) make the matter increasingly fair game for wider precedent?

It does seem odd that "the licensing mechanism in place is unconstitutional" would only apply to one person. The language of the ruling certainly wasn't written as if the judge was only thinking about her.

Muleskinner · Apr 28, 2021

TheBert said:
This is what torques me about the Federal Circuit system. Why are the laws between the several federal circuits different? Why is an FOID that is ruled as unconstitutional in one circuit not unconstitutional in another circuit.

Exactly...we are all suppose to be equal under the law....not even close..

jcutonilli · Apr 28, 2021

TheBert said:
This is what torques me about the Federal Circuit system. Why are the laws between the several federal circuits different? Why is an FOID that is ruled as unconstitutional in one circuit not unconstitutional in another circuit.

The federal laws are the same across all circuits. The federal courts can hear state law challenges, but only if they are challenged on federal issues such as the Constitution.

This particular case is a state law in a state court. How a particular state rules on their laws is not really applicable outside that particular state, although that ruling may persuade other courts to use the same logic in reaching a conclusion.

Illinois slapped down about FOID card

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Banana'd

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Powered by natural gas

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Not Even ONE Indictment

Ultimate Member

The Member

My hair is amazing

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

My hair is amazing

Ultimate Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

Ultimate Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics