Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: ComEd 4 trial coverage roundup
Posted in:
* I told you this was going to happen quite a while ago. Center Square…
The Illinois Supreme Court has granted a motion to pause proceedings in a challenge of Illinois’ gun and magazine ban pending the outcome of a separate challenge before the state’s high court.
Gov. J.B. Pritzker enacted the state’s ban on certain semi-automatic weapons and magazines Jan. 10. The law has been challenged in both federal and state courts.
One of the first state-level lawsuits came from attorney Thomas DeVore. He secured temporary restraining orders for thousands of named plaintiffs and gun stores in two cases from Effingham County and one from White County. The first case, named Accuracy Firearms v. Pritzker, was appealed by the state to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court decided the case challenging the law on equal protections was likely to advance on its merits.
Separately, a Macon County judge issued a final judgment that the law was unconstitutional based on the appeals court decision. That case was brought by state Rep. Dan Caulkins, R-Decatur. Because of the appeals court decision, the state appealed Caulkins’ case directly to the Illinois Supreme Court.
DeVore attempted to consolidate his cases with Caulkins’ case, a motion the Illinois Supreme Court denied. They are set to hear the Caulkins case in mid-May.
On March 31, the state filed an abeyance motion in the Accuracy Firearms case with the Illinois Supreme Court. The request was to hold the state’s appeal of a temporary restraining order in the DeVore case “pending the disposition” in the Caulkins case, “which is a direct appeal currently pending before this court.” […]
Tuesday, the Illinois Supreme Court granted the motion for abeyance, effectively holding off the appeal of the Effingham County TRO until the Caulkins case is resolved.
Meanwhile, DeVore is still trying to subpoena constitutionally protected legislative communications.
Either way, if Rep. Caulkins loses (and he probably will at the state level), then DeVore can ultimately claim victory by claiming he would’ve won if only Caulkins hadn’t interfered. Some folks believe that may actually be why DeVore is pulling his subpoena stunt.
Rep. Caulkins’ case has been scheduled for a May 16 Supreme Court hearing.
* The federal cases are more important, and here’s an update on one of those…
The federal appeals court in Chicago on Tuesday denied a request to block the Illinois assault weapons ban while it faces legal challenges.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request for an injunction by Robert Bevis, a firearms store owner in Naperville, while he appeals a ruling by U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall that found the ban “constitutionally sound.” […]
Bevis’ lawyers argued that his Law Weapons & Supply business suffered because of the ban and might end up closing if it can’t sell the popular guns.
In her ruling, Kendall wrote that, “because assault weapons are particularly dangerous weapons … their regulation accords with history and tradition.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 8:28 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: ComEd 4 trial coverage roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
In this post… Rich really talks to the truth.
The truth being that the strategy is about DeVore and his grift seemingly only wanting the appearance of legitimate litigation, and not the legitimate and purposeful strategy to maximize his (DeVore’s) own grift.
If you look at the grift strategy and choices to only the grifting, it all makes sense, checks cashing and whatnot.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 8:37 am
A DeVore loss is always an up day for Illinois.
Comment by Norseman Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 8:45 am
Quite a few more months to go. This circus act has only just begun.
Comment by H-W Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 8:57 am
“The truth being that the strategy is about DeVore and his grift”
The Strategy is for as many of these gun/magazine banning cases around the country (IL, CO, MA, and others) as possible to escape the pull of local and state judges and get them to the now clear Bruen SCOTUS.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:26 am
DeVore is the literal personification of the figure of speech describing playing chess with a pigeon.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:34 am
Without taking any position on this case or DeVore specifically, I want to address this:
== Meanwhile, DeVore is still trying to subpoena constitutionally protected legislative communications. ==
The number of attorneys who consistently try to do things that are expressly prohibited by law that I see both in cases I’m involved in, as well as ones I follow through the media remains wildly frustrating. Courts need to be more aggressive about slapping around attorneys who ask for things they clearly cannot get (or try to withhold things they clear should not be able to withhold). In such clear cut cases where the only possible answers are (1) the attorney knows he is in the wrong and is delaying, or (2) the attorney is just terrible and should have known he is in the wrong, courts are pretty terrible.
I’m an attorney, and I like my work. But I hate how easy it is for someone to accidentally (or intentionally) gum up the works of the US court system. It allows whichever party benefits from delay (or increased litigation costs) to achieve a significant unearned advantage.
Comment by Homebody Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:36 am
DeVore’s clients should open a class action against him for incompetence.
Comment by thechampaignlife Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:40 am
===The Strategy is…===
Tell me you’re a DeVore mark, without actually telling me you’re a DeVore mark.
Are you actually coming at DeVore as honest to his litigation here?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:47 am
-The Strategy is for as many of these gun/magazine banning cases around the country (IL, CO, MA, and others) as possible to escape the pull of local and state judges and get them to the now clear Bruen SCOTUS.-
If that was the strategy DeVore would have filed a case in Federal Court, like GOA, ISRA, etc., did. Then again it’s harder to get people to toss you retainers, and you actually have to put effort into to do that. The latter doesn’t strike me as one of Tommy Devores strong suits.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:55 am
- Mason born - knows the score.
Very well put I might add.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 9:59 am
Someone should tell Center Square that in Illinois we have appellate court districts, not circuits.
Comment by Big Dipper Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 11:44 am
7th Circuit is schizoid; they somehow have convinced themselves that carrying handguns can be mandated under the 2nd Amendment, but common rifles can be banned. The Circuit also ignored recent SCOTUS rulings overturning bans, so this should be on the SCOTUS docket shortly, perhaps for a simple per curiam “reversed and remanded for reconsideration consistent with NYSPRA, the Maryland ban being reversed, etc.”
Comment by thisjustinagain Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 12:21 pm
==Someone should tell Center Square that in Illinois we have appellate court districts, not circuits.==
They, probably like many other people in Springfield, long to go back to the days of Abraham Lincoln and him “riding the circuit.”
Comment by Stuck in Celliniland Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 12:27 pm
The Seventh Circuit has not even decided the case yet, take a nap.
Comment by Big Dipper Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 12:36 pm
==If that was the strategy DeVore would have filed a case in Federal Court, like GOA, ISRA, etc., did. Then again it’s harder to get people to toss you retainers, and you actually have to put effort into to do that. The latter doesn’t strike me as one of Tommy Devores strong suits.==
It also requires that he be admitted to practice in federal district court and is able to comply with filing requirements. Why go through all that effort when he’s already found a working business model?
Comment by Anon324 Wednesday, Apr 19, 23 @ 3:20 pm