Appeal in Moore v. Madigan (Ill ban on carrying)
No Lawyers, Only Guns and Money, has the story. The case challenges Illinois' effective ban on all carrying of handguns. The trial court dismissed the case, with some extremely sloppy reasoning (along the lines of "McDonald just dealt with possession in the home, so anything beyond that is outside the right to arms" and "rights are not unlimited, this is a limitation, therefore it is valid" and even "I think plaintiff will lose at trial, so I dismiss his case right now."
A notice of appeal was filed within hours, so we can hopefully look forward to another stunning Seventh Circuit ruling.
"Stunning"? The seventh will concur as they did in McDonald since the SCOTUS could only apply Heller to the home. The second amendment foundation will appeal, and the appeal may, or may not get taken up.
Posted by: Rob Morse at February 6, 2012 09:18 PM
We shall see. The 7th has done some interesting things in these cases. In McDonald, they moved the case along surprisingly quickly when they could have delayed and delayed.
And in the Ezell case (link removed to make the spam filter relax, but you can Google "Ezell v. Chicago" and it'll bring up David's posts on the case.)
.... the 7th gave the district court several good licks upside the head for its reason-free reasoning, not just overturning it but essentially chastising the lower court in the case that established that, yes, the 2nd Amendment is analogous to the 1st Amendment and firing ranges can no more be prohibited completely by a municipality than bookstores could be.
Given that history, it's hard to know for sure how the 7th will rule on this . . . and there's another RTC case, nearly identical but with an even more sympathetic plaintiff, "at the judgment stage" (I don't really know what that means, but a lawyer said it and it sounded like something I shouldn't leave out) in the southern district in Illinois.
Posted by: Don Gwinn at February 9, 2012 11:10 PM