What a marvelous brief. I would imagine SCOTUS Justices would really enjoy reading the brief and discovering how uninformed, misguided, wrong, or simply stupid they were in the Heller decision. Maybe I have not been reading enough Circuit Court documents, but I was not aware that it was fashionable to base a position on systematically attacking the wisdom of a SCOTUS decision.
SO happy to see somebody else say this. Legal stuff, the reading of it for the most part usually gives me a giant headache. Lots of wording I don't understand and so on but I try my best to make sense of it all. Made myself a bowl of popcorn (something somebody here said once before reading a brief so thought I would try it) grabbed a beer and read the whole thing from first to last paragraph. I can't think of a single case they referenced that I have any real knowledge or understanding of but what I did notice, or at least to me, was that every case that didn't support Chicago's point of view was decided due to the incompetance of the SCOTUS.... er, more or less.
So is this the way it is done, really?
Speaking in the purely laymen point of view, I think they deserve to be smacked down based on pure arrogance. I also have to say that any statement coming from Chicago's political and legal powers I would not have expected to sound any other way than it did.