Illinois assault weapons ban declared unconstitutional

M

Modean

.223 Rem
Messages
1,132
Reaction score
2,780
Location
Oswego County
Zerex said:
www.chicagotribune.com

Federal judge strikes down Illinois’ gun ban as unconstitutional; State quickly appeals.

A downstate federal judge ruled that Illinois’ sweeping gun ban is unconstitutional and can no longer be enforced after 30 days. The state quickly appealed.
www.chicagotribune.com www.chicagotribune.com

SHORT VERSION................... subject to appeal in next 30 days...........

Time will tell.
Click to expand...
Always. But the appeals court has to decide it they want to issue a decision that is going to go to SCOTUS and potentially set national policy.
 
spat

spat

.700 Nitro Express
Messages
29,854
Reaction score
62,886
Location
Formerly Geneseo, NY. Now free in AZ
Modean said:
Always. But the appeals court has to decide it they want to issue a decision that is going to go to SCOTUS and potentially set national policy.
Click to expand...
The appeals court doesn't have a choice.

No matter what decision they issue it's likely to be appealed to SCOTUS.

The only way to avoid that is for the state to drop their appeal and let this decision stand.

But that is the state's decision, not the appeals court's.
 
RedBreast21

RedBreast21

6.5 Creedmoor
Messages
1,583
Reaction score
2,589
Location
Westchester county
Celt said:
What other circuit court decisions do we have that cause the conflict and how can we get an AW ban case to the scotus?

Im dying for NY to get bitch slapped.
Click to expand...
Even with the CT case heading to the 2nd circuit, I expect a ruling that keeps mag capacity at 10 rounds and registration at a minimum. This would then conflict with this recent ruling. The 9th circuit has similar cases pending and although some favorable rulings has come from that court the issues are not legally identical. The 4th circuit is dealing with Maryland's cases. When these other circuit courts issue rulings, then a clear difference in the rulings will be defined sending it all the SCOTUS for either defined guidance and sent back or ruled on permanently.
 
Z

Zerex

.308 Win
Messages
3,008
Reaction score
2,391
Location
Rome, NY
Vanderstock case, regarding Ghost Guns, was argued before SCOTUS on Oct 8.

I listened to oral arguments last nite on C-span.

Lower court said, "Frame and Receiver Final Rule"---- ATF overstepped its legal bounds.
Like in Bump Stock case.

Arguments at SCOTUS, were insanely confusing, as Justices tried to understand the Gov't's position,which was illogical..........GUNS HURT WOMEN, CHILDREN AND ANIMALS........it appeared that the ATF did overstep its legal boundaries, as govt agreed, that if the law included more provisions, ATF/Garland rule would been legal, but the law does not include that provision.

Case included parts A and part B, and was confusing when part A and part B rules applied..............Justices were pissed.

Decision could be soon, or not...............SCOTUS could just uphold lower Courts's well reasoned decision,........ or issue a new more expansive decision, supporting it.

If an Agency oversteps, it oversteps...........so ATF /AG final rule, has to be cancelled entirely, and let Congress rewrite the laws.. like in Bump Stock decision...very consistent.

SCOTUS could slap the ATF down again, and issue a blockbuster decision.......

LIbs predict the opposite outcome.............."FOR THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN."

Is a pen and a blank pad of paper a “grocery list?” Does a bunch of uncooked eggs, ham, and peppers constitute an “omelet?” Alito’s point appeared to be that, just like untouched ingredients don’t constitute an “omelet,” an incomplete firearm is not a gun.

We will see.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top