Another factor that often influences the justices' decision to take up a case is when lower courts come to different conclusions about the law's meaning. Gura's clients and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, defending the law, disagree about whether there is a split among federal appeals courts.
Gura said the Illinois ruling "brings this split into sharp relief at the federal appellate level."
But Schneiderman said the decision in Illinois stressed the unique nature of the state law that was struck down and contrasted that law with the statutes in New York and elsewhere that give officials wide discretion in deciding whether to grant permits to carry guns in public.
I guess Schneiderman is arguing that there is no split because Moore deals with a "unique" outright ban in Illinois while the situation in New York is completely different. Kachalski and Moore are Apples and Oranges - no relation, no split.
Gura says that a split exists between CA2 and CA7 in that CA2 says that "the Second Amendment has no practical impact beyond the threshold of one’s home." While "In contrast, the Seventh Circuit has now twice invalidated restrictions on Second Amendment rights outside the home. That court asserts that the right is equally important outside the home as inside, and has declared that regardless of location"