So Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett is getting involved in the Illinois AWB ban. This is pretty big news that could have far reaching implications. The city of Naperville, Illinois passed an AWB of their own before the Illinois state wide ban. Lawsuits were filed including for an injunction and was turned down twice including the federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals via a 3 judge panel. So the plaintiffs appealed to SCOTUS a few weeks ago and holy cow Amy Coney Barret responded who oversees such matters for the 7th. The video below by Four Boxes Diner explains what all this means much better than I can.

What is very significant is that currently Illinois has an injunction on their AWB via an order by Stephen P. McGlynn who was appointed by President Trump. The state of Illinois has appealed that injunction to the federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals just a few days ago. Mark W Williams from the video below says to not necessarily an injunction from SCOTUS but that more likely that they may be just sending a very strong message that they are very interested in the case and paying close attention and by the way keep in mind that Bruen decision we did last summer and the whole Second Amendment scrutiny standard is now text, tradition and history. Naperville, Illinois has until May 8 to respond.

One way SCOTUS can clean up this 2A fight is to send a message that new laws are going to fail, bans are going to fail, this is the way to help quell their push to get rid of guns by social media and liberal/leftists.

JMO most of then know these will fail if they get to SCOTUS, but they don't care, as long as they shut guns down for a few years.

That's why 2AF is a good place to donate, in fact Sig and 2AF have a fund raiser going on, enter and you have a chance of winning a p320 and a day at Sig Academy

https://secure.anedot.com/saf/sigexperience

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

JMO most of then know these will fail if they get to SCOTUS, but they don't care, as long as they shut guns down for a few years.

Because legislators bear no personal liability for passing clearly unconstitutional crappy laws, this is ABSOLUTELY true. They know these are only temporary speed bumps, but they're OK with that as long as they're "doing something" and can gum the works up for a while.

Happily, the

Illinois response:

"It is a scary, black, fully automated, 500 or high caliber, high capacity, assault rifle with a pistol grip and a thing that goes up. It shoots 5,000 high caliber bullets per second at children. It must be banned!!"

I find it very encouraging that Amy Coney Barrett is doing this just before the 7th is going to take up the appeal by the state to stay the injunction in place. She sure showed some "sense of urgency" considering she just received the request a couple weeks ago I believe. I have to believe the Justices who voted for the Bruen decision must be very frustrated with the continued blatant ignoring of the law concerning the Second Amendment. Hopefully this is a sign that they plan to expedite relief for these egregious laws.

The next step is to make lawmakers personally liable for the costs of laws the SCOTUS strikes down. Otherwise they will never stop.

Tried for treason.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
The next step is to make lawmakers personally liable for the costs of laws the SCOTUS strikes down. Otherwise they will never stop.

Bingo.
Until it starts to come directly out of their pocket instead of the tax payers pocket this will continue, they have nothing to loose.

Naperville is a very affluent suburb of Chicago. Most of us could not afford to live there. They have ample money to pursue the AWB agenda

quote:

Originally posted by 71 TRUCK:

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
The next step is to make lawmakers personally liable for the costs of laws the SCOTUS strikes down. Otherwise they will never stop.

Bingo.
Until it starts to come directly out of their pocket instead of the tax payers pocket this will continue, they have nothing to loose.

I've been pounding this drum for years. All politicians should be required to maintain-at their own expense-malpractice insurance.

quote:

Originally posted by Rick Lee:
The next step is to make lawmakers personally liable for the costs of laws the SCOTUS strikes down. Otherwise they will never stop.

Yeah, it’s a ridiculous fantasy, but I like the idea that any legislator who writes or votes for, and any executive who signs a law that is found to be unconstitutional is immediately removed from office, immediately begins their mandatory five year prison sentence, and is subject to a lifetime ban from ever working for or in the government in any capacity.

Of course we’d never get such a law passed. If it were passed there would be unintended deleterious effects. Still it is a nice dream…

In 2001, I thought about moving to Naperville. Called a local realtor to see home in my price range. She actually asked me how do you know you can afford this price range, I answered…hmm, the bank that pre approved me…and why are you questioning it? I was not impressed with the attitude. Ended up in Yorkville and then Oswego…but chuckled anytime we met people from Naperville. Remind me of that cartoon sketch of people smelling their own farts because they are so smug. Barrington come close.

I grew up in the Oswego area. There certainly was a significant portion of people from Naperville that had the same attitude as the realtor you describe.

As a Naperville North graduate, I am embarrassed on what that city has become. It was a great place to grow up in the 70’s and 90’s. Glad I got out when I did.