You can listen to the oral arguments here. At first I was a little worried, because the questioning of the panel seemed to be all over the place, and asking difficult questions of Mr. Gura and Mr. Cooper which to me seemed to be outside the scope of what the courts can do, but I guess reflected some concern from the panel about carrying in bars, etc.
But then the grilling of the Illinois Attorney started, and things started, to put it mildly, looking up. Go have a listen. Keep in mind, the courts can only really say Illinois’ statute is constitutional or not. It would be up to the legislature to craft a bill that would pass constitutional muster, and it should be noted a bill is already introduced that would accomplish that, and has very near the votes needed for passage.
Now if the Illinois law is tossed on Constitutional grounds, I don’t believe Illinois would be permitted to enforce it. The question is, will the legislature want to “settle out of court,” so to speak, and pass a right-to-carry bill now, rather than risk the state, essentially, going constitutional carry. Would our side be willing to take the deal? Risk is inherent for both sides. What if the courts opinion hints at may-issue being constitutional? What if we lose outright? For them, what if it invalidates the law, and essentially anyone who can legally possess a gun in Illinois can carry?
Also interesting is whether the disposition of Judge Posner to the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has changed. It seems from this case he may have warmed up to the idea.
12 thoughts on “Oral Arguments in Shepard & Moore”
Bad audio link
audio can be accessed through here: http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx
W/ this case #: 12-1269
…to keep and BEAR arms…”
Hmm…if a judge can’t get this right, he is incompetent.
People seem to be hanging all of their 2A dreams on Gura, who is anti-2A. They lost in the first circuit, probably the tenth and now they will lose here too. And would someone explain to him that all he has to do is look up the 1833 case of Simpson v the state of Tennessee to see what affray really means.
Perhaps you should sort them all out by open carrying an AK pistol in Chicago?
I’m sure your legal expertise will sort out them Illinoisans much faster than that closet gun banner Gura would.
I would open carry in Chicago, but it is illegal. Besides, my open carry lawsuit will be argued infront of the 6th ciruit ca next month.
Then why are you complaining about Gura’s work if you are not willing to use your usual tactics there?
I would guess that Illinios will carefully craft another unacceptable law, and fight to defend it to the Supreme Court level. This would accomplish another lengthy delay, keeping citizens from exercising their rights, at no cost, except to the citizens, who are denied their rights and being forced to pay for the ldegal proceedings.
Interesting audio. Looks like the panel already has their direction and is looking for limiting factors. Posner appears to be the one going to write this (could prove interesting). They obviously still want to find the limits of the right, but they didn’t find them this day. Another fight, another day.
Hopefully we see this before the next CA-7 term in September. Will prove useful in a bunch of other cases (Woollard in 4; Hightower in 1, etc.).
But it looks like IL will need to get to work on something else. Or they can just sit back and pass no law. Nobody says you need to pass a law to carry a gun. In the absence of laws preventing carry, why pass laws in favor of carry?
Realistically, if the decision strikes IL law preventing carry, that is the argument they need to make to the statehouse: we don’t need a law to carry, and we’ll take down anything that stops us from effectively doing so. Cook County/Chicago can go play in traffic.
I am over-simplifying, but the simple fact is that once the people have the right in their pocket, it’s harder to go against it. Not impossible, just a little more difficult. Hopefully difficult enough to end the Chicago reign of denial on the whole of the state.
7th Circuit Panel was made up of:
06/08/2012 39 Case heard and taken under advisement by panel: Richard A. Posner, Circuit Judge; Joel M. Flaum, Circuit Judge and Ann Claire Williams, Circuit Judge.   [12-1269, 12-1788] (RS)
Posner is a Reagan appointee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner)
Williams is a Reagan/Clinton appointee and thought of as SCOTUS appointee and a moderate/conservative(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Claire_Williams)
Flaum is a Reagan appointee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Martin_Flaum)
Not bad for a panel.
Comments are closed.