search
top

Motions Proceeding in Federal Court in Illinois

Madigan makes a motion to dismiss the case as moot, since the state has fixed the problem. Plaintiffs say, “not so fast,” and request the State of Illinois be enjoined from enforcing the newly passed FCCA until the permitting system is in place and operating “in a timely manner,” as mentioned in the motion for injunction. There’s also a motion to expedite briefing on the motions, so we can get this over with quickly and prevent the State of Illinois from dragging its feet even further. It would be a good incentive for the State to get everything set up quickly. Otherwise I’d expect they’ll drag this out as long as possible. From the response to the motion to dismiss:

The Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights have been violated each and every day since December 11, 2012, when the Seventh Circuit reversed this Court and held that the UUW and the AUUW violated the Plaintiffs’ rights …. Indeed, they have been violated each and every day since Illinois enacted its carry ban …. The FCCA makes plain that said violation of Plantiffs’ rights will not cease for up to another 270 days — 180 days to make application forms available and another 90 days to process said applications…. The State has effectively given itself that which the Seventh Circuit refused — a further stay of the appellate court’s mandate… The violation of the Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights occurred today and will occur tomorrow and each and every day until the expiration of the 270-day stay that Illinois has given to itself in the FCCA. The Defendants cannot meet the first prong of the voluntary-cessation test described above.

Nope. This isn’t over. Not by a long shot folks. These people need to start understanding this is a right, and not a privilege. This all could have been easily avoided by passing a reasonable shall-issue bill as soon as the court ruling came down. But that’s not what many Illinois Democratic leaders chose to do. They chose to stall, whine, kick, scream, delay, and obstruct. Well, the wages of that might be FOID carry until they can get their act together. Let us hope.

16 Responses to “Motions Proceeding in Federal Court in Illinois”

  1. Kevin Highland says:

    An Illinois citizen watching the process closely! I’m eager to see what happens.

  2. jdrush says:

    I’m an Iowa citizen following it closely, too. If only to apply for a non-resident permit. And I have family in Illinois that will be applying at the same time.

    • Ish says:

      Will Illinois be required to issue non-resident permits? I can hardly see the Chicago, er, Democrats going that far… and it seems like that would be easier to defend in the courts.

      • Michael B says:

        Yes, the law requires shall issue of permits to out of state residents.

        • Rob Crawford says:

          Have you seen the price? ISTR it’s like $750, with a five year expiration.

          • Dirk Diggler says:

            $300 for out of state permits plus 16 hrs of training. Appears that up to 8 hrs of prior training (ie, NRA course) may count. State Police have 30 days to come up with training rules. I really don’t see how you can train for 16 hrs

            • Rob Crawford says:

              Really? I could have sworn it was much, much higher.

              Does the training include classroom? Because that would be about what Ohio requires, classroom and range.

              • Ish says:

                Whoa, so they don’t want poor folks to be able to carry if they live in- or out-of-state. At least they’re consistent…

                I’m just going to have to hope they eventually recognize my Michigan permission slip.

  3. Tony W Rodgers says:

    As all ways it all about Chicago we must conform to the will from up north they know best. Maybe they should become there own State.

  4. Dann in Ohio says:

    Predictions from a country boy… A) Two years after the Illinois CCW law is in effect, everyone will wonder what the fuss was all about… B) In three years after the Illinois CCW law is in effect, they will find that gun crimes have dropped in numbers during the first two years… C) Five years after the Illinois CCW law is in effect, they will have success with legislation loosening up the CCW laws for Illinois…

    Dann in Ohio

    • J says:

      Except the Chicago machine will now scream that the reason there is gun violence in Chicago is because the rest of the state has gone all Wild West and teh gunz are easier to get than water at the tap.

      • The Jack says:

        They do that already both with adjacent states and downstate.

        I mean it’s not like having CCW being legal makes it easier to buy guns.

        But there I go again with logic.

  5. mikee says:

    Recall that in NC, a county sheriff decided that while he had to issue permits under “shall issue” he did not have to issue applications for permits, requiring months-long waits for an appointment to get a permit.

    Such shenanigans will likely be repeated, only with infinitely more zeal, by the Chicago political machine.

    • Ish says:

      This would be a very, very good time for any out-of-work, just-finished-law-school types to get admitted to the Illinois State Bar. I predict the next decade is going to be full of people needing sternly written letters from counsel to city councils, to say nothing of actual litigation.

    • MichaelB says:

      The Illinois apps are administered by the state police. Local po po can object but then there is an appeals process that they wouldn’t want to deal with. Our side does appear to be learning.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Court Won’t Hasten Concealed Carry in Illinois | Shall Not Be Questioned - [...] Earlier I had mentioned that motions were filed to enjoin the State of Illinois from enforcing its p... until…
top