SAF SUES CHICAGO OVER GUN RANGE PROHIBITION ON 1A, 2A GROUNDS

The new motion for Temporary Restraining Order Item 25 by the Plaintiffs was DENIED.


Ruling is Item 36 on the Docket.

More to come, I'm sure...

krucam said:

The new motion for Temporary Restraining Order Item 25 by the Plaintiffs was DENIED.


Ruling is Item 36 on the Docket.

More to come, I'm sure...

Click to expand...

I guess they don't have to explain why they decided not grant the TRO, huh?

The reasoning will be in the transcript of the hearing. We should have it in a few days.

Courts just don't want to grant a TRO or anything related to something that has yet to be decided. In this case, the status of not only the law but also the right is in question and there is zero jurisprudence anywhere in the nation on it (this case intends to create it). Judges are reluctant to make jurisprudence from a TRO without a hearing. Look to the nationwide plethroa of cases where the judges/courts are all saying "don't want to go there." Hell, one court even openly admitted it.

I believe she was set to rule the whole enchilada soon after the final hearing on the 30th and she gave impression it would be before the law takes effect on the 8th. Chicago also got the smackdown on vacating the schedule and delaying yet again. Maybe she's just sick of the drama - she made a schedule and by golly we're going to stick to it. Nothing sooner, nothing later.

Ultimately the decision comes from a lower court and will be appealed by whoever loses this round.

From Item 36 in the Docket:

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, September 16, 2010:
MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: MOTION by Plaintiffs
Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. for temporary restraining order[25] is denied.
MOTION by Defendant City Of Chicago to vacate briefing schedule and preliminary injunction hearing set for October 1 [27] is denied.
Status hearing set for 9/23/2010 at 09:00 AM.
Advised in open court notice(tsa, )

Click to expand...

Hearing tomorrow morning, should be interesting...this Judge has so far proven to be fair, or at least equally unfair! She has indicated (at least to me) that Chicago is the more burdened party in this one.

It has been a very busy 3-4 days with Ezell, leading up to what was to be a Status Hearing today. Last item on the public Docket was 36. I just logged in via PACER and....

09/20/2010 37 MOTION by Defendant City Of Chicago for leave to file excess pages instanter (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit A-D)(Aguiar, William) (Entered: 09/20/2010)

09/20/2010 38 NOTICE of Motion by William Macy Aguiar for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages 37 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/23/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Aguiar, William) (Entered: 09/20/2010)

09/22/2010 39 MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: MOTION by Defendant City Of Chicago for leave to file excess pages instanter 37 is granted. The brief shall be filed as a separate document and not as an attachment.Mailed notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/22/2010 40 MOTION by Defendant City Of Chicago for extension of time to file answer or otherwise plead (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/22/2010 41 NOTICE of Motion by Rebecca Alfert Hirsch for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer 40 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/23/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/22/2010 42 MEMORANDUM by City Of Chicago in Opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, motion for permanent injunction,, 4 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-D)(Aguiar, William) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/22/2010 43 NOTICE by City Of Chicago re memorandum in opposition to motion 42 for preliminary injunction (Aguiar, William) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/22/2010 44 MOTION by Defendant City Of Chicago Defendant's Emergency Motion for Leave to Allow Additional Discovery or in the Alternative to Bar Certain Witnesses (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/22/2010 45 NOTICE of Motion by Rebecca Alfert Hirsch for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief 44 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/23/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

09/23/2010 46 MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: Status hearing stricken for 9/23/2010 and reset for 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notice (tsa, ) (Entered: 09/23/2010)

Click to expand...

10 new filings! So...with a known Status Hearing scheduled for today 9/23, Chicago is busy the days preceeding with filing motions.

New Status Hearing is now next Tues, 9/28. I'm glad Judge Kendall only gave them a few days, but still. Their tactics are becoming plainly obvious...no surprise, but frustrating.

MD is going to follow this trail, right on down to witness intimidation. But MD doesn't have the experience with it that Chicago does. There's an art there I hope MD lacks.

That's horseshit, I can't believe she allowed that. She knows what they are doing and she's letting them get away with it.

And this is why the district judge in the NY carry case maintains an individual practice of having a pre-meeting before either party can submit a motion. They'd get verbally slapped down before they can even put the paper on the desk in her court room.

More fun:

2010-09-23 47 0 Amended NOTICE of Motion by Rebecca Alfert Hirsch for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief 44 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/23/2010)

2010-09-23 48 0 MOTION by Defendant City Of Chicago for extension of time to file answer Filed as Emergency Motion (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/23/2010)

2010-09-23 49 0 NOTICE of Motion by Rebecca Alfert Hirsch for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer 48 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/23/2010)

Click to expand...

They filed an emergency motion to extend the time to file an emergency motion for an extension of time to perform yet more discovery of witnesses.

You can bet Gansler is watching.

This judge needs to deliver the smackdown. But it ain't gonna happen.

Patrick said:

More fun:



They filed an emergency motion to extend the time to file an emergency motion for an extension of time to perform yet more discovery of witnesses.

You can bet Gansler is watching.

This judge needs to deliver the smackdown. But it ain't gonna happen.

Click to expand...

Damn Patrick...beat me...

Just uploaded a few docs from the last few days to the Internet Archive Docket, they may not be viewable for a couple hours but they're coming.
http://ia360707.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.ilnd.246475/gov.uscourts.ilnd.246475.docket.html

In summary:
Doc 37 - 2pg Motion for Leave to file excess pages.
They're limited to a 15pg reply, requesting 25pgs for brief in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion, to adequately raise and discuss all of the grounds....Exhibit 1.
Doc 37-1 - 30pgs
Exhibit 1. No court has ever said a gun range is protected by the 2A
Doc 37-2 - 84pgs
Exhibit A: Transcript from TRO hearing August 23, 2010. Excerpt only, remember this is Chicago's motion.
Exhibit B & C: Blood in the streets, Chicago has gun murders so we need to restrict guns, they then present their new laws post-McDonald, showing revisions from pre-McDonald.
Exhibit D: I'm sure it's referenced somewhere in the primary Doc 37, but I'm not going to look. It DOES FASCINATE me as it is a Court ruling on Daly's seizure and closure of the beautiful lakefront Meigs Field. Interesting read if you're into the Aviation/Air Trafific world. Starts on pg 41 of the pdf if interested. Microsoft Flight Simulator will never be the same...

Doc 40 - 3pg Motion to extension of time, to answer Plaintiffs Complaint until October 25, 2010.

2. As this Court is well aware, since the time that Plaintiffs filed their Complaint approximately one month ago, the City and its counsel have devoted an extraordinary amount of time and energy defending against Plaintiffs’ allegations and various motions. Specifically, in the last month, the City has: (1) prepared for and attended three emergency hearings sought by Plaintiffs: two motions for a temporary restraining order and a motion to quash a deposition; (2) prepared three written memoranda in response to Plaintiffs’ two motions for temporary restraining order and their motion for a preliminary injunction; and (3) engaged in discovery in preparation for the preliminary injunction hearing set for October 1, 2010, including propounding written discovery, reviewing discovery responses and documents produced by Plaintiffs, and preparing for and conducting ten depositions.
3. Furthermore, between now and October 1, the City’s counsel must prepare for the preliminary injunction hearing, which will involve culling through deposition testimony and other evidence to identify support for its factual assertions, preparing its legal argument, preparing for direct and cross-examination of witnesses, drafting stipulations, preparing motions in limine, and identifying trial exhibits. The City also anticipates preparing and submitting a post-trial brief at the conclusion of the hearing.

Click to expand...

Doc 41 - 1pg
Notice that Chicago is coming in on Thursday, Sept 23 to file for Motion for Extension of Time, Doc 40. This was filed on Sept 22, the day prior.

Doc 42 (30pg + 84pg Exhibits) seems eerily similar to Doc 37. I'm not downloading (paying) for this tripe a 2nd time.
MEMORANDUM by City Of Chicago in Opposition to motion for preliminary injunction, motion for permanent injunction,, 4[RECAP] (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-D)(Aguiar, William) (Entered: 09/22/2010)

Doc 43 is a notice of filing Doc 42.

Doc 44 - 28pgs
MOTION by Defendant City Of ChicagoDefendant's Emergency Motion for Leave to Allow Additional Discovery or in the Alternative to Bar Certain Witnesses

Doc 45 - 1pg
Notice that Chicago is coming in on Thursday to file for Emergency Motion For Leave To Allow Additional Discovery Or In The Alternative To Bar Certain Witnesses.

Doc 46 - 1pg
MINUTE entry before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall: Status hearing stricken for 9/23/2010 and reset for 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM.

Doc 47 - 2pg
Amended NOTICE of Motion by Rebecca Alfert Hirsch for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief 44[RECAP] before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM.

Doc 48 - 3pgs
DEFENDANT’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD TO PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT

Defendant City of Chicago (the “City”), by its attorney, Mara S. Georges, Corporation Counsel for the City of Chicago, respectfully requests an extension of time to answer Plaintiffs’ Complaint until October 25, 2010, and in support thereof, states as follows:

Click to expand...

yada, yada, yada...

49 NOTICE of Motion by Rebecca Alfert Hirsch for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer 48[RECAP] before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Hirsch, Rebecca) (Entered: 09/23/2010)


This would almost be comical if I wasn't so wrapped up in the Plaintiff's position...

Patrick said:

OK, Gura is just having fun with this now. Sounds like something we'd write.



For everyone not interested in reading the whole 12 pages (they are good), Gura is demanding a Temporary Restraining Order (again). The last one was shot down because the judge said there was no imminent mobile range being delivered.

This time the SAF rented the mobile range (for $15K, paying a non-refundable half up front), put gas in it and has a driver ready to take it to leased land on South Bell Ave on the South side next week.

It's a fun read because he brings bibles, porn shops, abortion clinics and churches into the argument. Also, this is the kind of junk we're going to be fighting for years: zoning, "creative" restrictions and the like. You should take the time to read it.

Click to expand...

It's amazing while reading this document it seems so painfully apparent that the City is clearly in the wrong here. Very well written!

Defendants Emergency Motion for an extension cites the tedium of responding to plaintiff's "multiple briefs"...in response to Chicago's games. It's creative accounting to count the plaintiff's responses to defendant's requests as reason they need an extension.

The judge will give them more time, even though she said she wanted to close this thing out before the law went into effect October 8. She has not show much brass so far, so she'll let them push her over again.

Patrick said:

Defendants Emergency Motion for an extension cites the tedium of responding to plaintiff's "multiple briefs"...in response to Chicago's games. It's creative accounting to count the plaintiff's responses to defendant's requests as reason they need an extension.

The judge will give them more time, even though she said she wanted to close this thing out before the law went into effect October 8. She has not show much brass so far, so she'll let them push her over again.

Click to expand...

The third largest City in the US, and one of the most over-taxed cities, can't afford a few more attorneys to help them sift through a little bit of paperwork, the same papers that several mds peruse in their spare time??

The real goal is to delay this case (Ezell) so that it can be combined with a similar NRA suit (Benton) assigned to a different judge (Guzman) who is ranked exceptionally unfriendly to guns. The current judge appears more fair and Chicago does not like a fair fight.

I think this will be ruled on soon. But not on our schedule of "yesterday".

The Docket has been lit up again on this one, this time by the Plaintiffs (Gura).

There are now 55 filings in this case. Filed yesterday:

2010-09-27 50 0 MOTION by Plaintiffs Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.in limine no. 1: to exclude six witnesses (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support)(Gura, Alan) (Entered: 09/27/2010) 2010-09-28 02:06:28
50 1 Memorandum in Support 2010-09-28 02:07:28

2010-09-27 51 0 NOTICE of Motion by Alan Gura for presentment of motion in limine, 50 before Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 9/28/2010 at 09:00 AM. (Gura, Alan) (Entered: 09/27/2010) 2010-09-28

2010-09-27 52 0 REPLY by Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. to MOTION by Plaintiffs Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. for preliminary injunction MOTION by Plaintiffs Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. for permanent injunction 4 , memorandum in opposition to motion 42 (Gura, Alan) (Entered: 09/27/2010) 2010-09-28

2010-09-27 53 0 NOTICE by Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. re reply to response to motion,, 52 (Gura, Alan) (Entered: 09/27/2010) 2010-09-28 02:56:22

2010-09-27 54 0 MEMORANDUM by Action Target, Inc., Joseph I. Brown, Rhonda Ezell, William Hespen, Illinois State Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. in Opposition to motion for miscellaneous relief 44 (Sigale, David) (Entered: 09/27/2010) 2010-09-28 02:57:35

2010-09-27 55 0 NOTICE by All Plaintiffs re memorandum in opposition to motion 54 to Allow Additional Discovery or Bar Certain Witnesses (Sigale, David) (Entered: 09/27/2010) 2010-09-28 03:08:27

Click to expand...

Item 52 is by far the best of these for a read, only 15 pages. Item 54 has a good summary of the stalling being done here.

CONCLUSION
Defendants’ Motion is without merit. Discovery closed weeks ago, Plaintiffs bent over backward to comply with the multiple written and oral discovery levied by the Defendant. Plaintiffs’ counsel attended ten depositions, including on the last day of discovery, and even had the unique experience of doing two depositions at the same time: breaking from one to conduct a second, and then continuing the first one afterwards.
Unsurprisingly, Defendant has filed another Motion to extend discovery, which has been at least twice denied already. Discovery closed weeks ago. The hearing date of October 1, 2010 is approaching, with much preparation still to do by Plaintiffs’ counsel. The Court should put a stop to Defendants’ repeated attempts to harass Plaintiffs after they jumped through every one of Defendant’s hoops, often with all due haste.

Click to expand...

There is a scheduled hearing for Friday, Oct 1st.

Oreo said:

I was just thinking things had been a little too quiet for a little too long.

Got this email from SAF 15min ago:

Click to expand...

Isn't Chicago where the Pretenders Chief of Staff just resigned to run for Mayor, must be a lovley place, and I thought Murderland was bad?

Ed

But it is wrong to suggest that the Seventh Circuit has reserved for the peaceful, law-abiding people a lower level of review than is employed for violent felons, drug abusers, and other dangerous individuals arguably covered by a presumptive exception.

Click to expand...

that phrase really caught my eye. I like to think the real sentiment here is, "Stop Treating We the People like Common Criminals."

Seventh Circuit’s opinions applying intermediate review. But notably, Prof. Winkler agrees that Chicago’s range ban is unconstitutional: “Reasonable gun control is one thing, this another. Chicago requires 1 hour on range for handgun permit but bars ranges.” www.twitter.com/ adamwinkler, Aug. 16, 2010, 3:18 p.m. (citation omitted) (last visited Sept. 26, 2010).

Click to expand...

He cited a twitter post I love Alan Gura.

Seeing as how we're quoting Gura...this one is a gem: "Individuals wishing to assert their constitutional rights cannot be told to move along."

We need a thread just to track Gura's quotes. I'd set it up, but am at yet another sushi bar on yet another beach, in yet another state, drinking yet another glass...while waiting for the family at home to call. At least this time we got a lot of family with the wife to keep things interesting back home while I am gone. Hope they don't break my guns - they are, ironically, visiting from Chicago.

Patrick said:

Seeing as how we're quoting Gura...this one is a gem: "Individuals wishing to assert their constitutional rights cannot be told to move along."

We need a thread just to track Gura's quotes. I'd set it up, but am at yet another sushi bar on yet another beach, in yet another state, drinking yet another glass...

Click to expand...

You suck...a Tropical Depression is heading our way...

Patrick said:

...Hope they don't break my guns - they are, ironically, visiting from Chicago.

Click to expand...

You did hide the ammo at least, right?