|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 31, 2011, 10:03 AM | #76 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,468
|
I sincerely hope the Federal courts agree on not liking people/entities who thumb their noses at the SCOTUS.
|
July 31, 2011, 10:47 AM | #77 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Um, ah, again!
|
August 1, 2011, 02:35 PM | #78 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 2, 2010
Location: Not far enough from Chicago
Posts: 394
|
Quote:
|
|
August 1, 2011, 02:52 PM | #79 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 1, 2009
Location: Stillwater, OKlahoma
Posts: 8,638
|
That's the plan,,,
Quote:
Out of the gun laws that crop up in Illinois, Chicago in particular. They are specifically designed to hinder gun ownership. Aarond
__________________
Never ever give an enemy the advantage of a verbal threat. Caje: The coward dies a thousand times, the brave only once. Kirby: That's about all it takes, ain't it? Aarond is good,,, Aarond is wise,,, Always trust Aarond! (most of the time) |
|
August 1, 2011, 09:28 PM | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 2, 2010
Location: Not far enough from Chicago
Posts: 394
|
I know that. I live here.
|
August 11, 2011, 03:41 PM | #81 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
More on the case:
Quote:
|
|
August 30, 2011, 10:23 PM | #82 | ||||||
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
As you know, the Ezell case has returned to district court. Chicago changed their laws and immediately filed their MTD. Yesterday, Alan Gura filed his Opposition to that Motion.
It starts with this little quip: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Regardless, the City will respond on 09-12-2011 (it was originally set for 09-06-2011, but the Judge is giving the City an extra week). The Judge will issue her ruling by mail (Minute entry #117, made on 08-17 - this basically strikes her previous Minute entry #116, made on 08-11). My conjecture at this point is that Judge Kendall is not taking the 7th's ruling on the injunction seriously. My reasoning is rather simple. Sixty days will have passed since the 7th mandated that the injunction be applied and this judge is taking all the time in the world to rule on a very, very weak MTD by the defendants, as if there is no injury to the plaintiffs. Contrary to the "irreparable harm" ruling by the 7th Circuit. Hence my fantasy, above. |
||||||
August 31, 2011, 03:49 AM | #83 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Can district judges be held in contempt of the higher court?
|
August 31, 2011, 07:31 AM | #84 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
In theory, yes. Has it ever actually happened? I don't know.
|
August 31, 2011, 09:00 AM | #85 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,457
|
Judges can hold one another in contempt and send deputies/sheriffs to arrest one another.
The specific instance of which I am aware: Judge A schedules a trial in Mr. Smith's case. A week later Judge B schedules another of Mr. Smith's cases for the same day. Mr. Smith protests to Judge B that he is already scheduled for trial that day. Judge B, well known for the expanse of his personality, tells Mr. Smith that if he isn't there to start the trial, he will send uniforms to arrest him for contempt. Mr. Smith lets Judge A know that he will be arrested if he shows for Judge A's trial, whereupon Judge A calls Judge B to advise that Judge B will be held in contempt and arrested if he orders the arrest of Mr. Smith for compliance with Judge A's scheduling order. However, for just not getting the law correct, I don't see contempt as an available remedy.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; August 31, 2011 at 11:10 AM. |
August 31, 2011, 01:01 PM | #86 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
But they HAVE been ordered to issue it. They could find that the ordinance substantially identical in it's present form and issue against that. Last edited by maestro pistolero; August 31, 2011 at 03:28 PM. |
|
August 31, 2011, 01:13 PM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,457
|
I don't think the exact ordinance having been repealed would be the obstacle. Gura's argument pertains to the substance of the ordinance and its application.
I can't think of an instance of a trial court simply refusing to follow an explicit instruction from a court of appeals.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
August 31, 2011, 01:46 PM | #88 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
I think we are looking at that trial court, right now.
If you read the errors committed by Judge Kendall in not following the guidance of the en banc circuit in Skoien as enumerated by the panel in Ezell, we are seeing it happen at this minute. Remember, the panel held that irreparable harm was ongoing. They issued a mandate to the trial court: Docket entry #112; The district court's order denying the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is REVERSED, with costs, and the case is REMANDED with instructions to enter a preliminary injunction consistent with this opinion. Judge Kendall ignored the mandate and proceeded with the MTD for mootness as if there were no harm being committed. Coincidently, this also goes against the direct wording of the SCOTUS in Heller. Quote:
|
|
August 31, 2011, 01:52 PM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,747
|
So if we theorize out a bit...... what kind of sanction or other "punishment" is Judge Kendall in for here?
If found to be in contempt, do they arrest and jail? Is there a review board process? Just what is possible? Or does that kind of process start and finish behind closed doors so we never really know?
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......” President John F. Kennedy |
August 31, 2011, 02:00 PM | #90 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,457
|
Cowtowner, so long as we are just theorizing, my mind turns to the issue of federal judicial tenure being limited by the "good behavior" standard, and the remedy of impeachment.
Given current congressional make-up, that is strictly a theoretical remedy.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
August 31, 2011, 02:20 PM | #91 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 17, 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,857
|
Holy tomato, this case makes my brain hurt!
__________________
"A human being is primarily a bag for putting food into; the other functions and faculties may be more godlike, but in point of time they come afterwards." -George Orwell |
August 31, 2011, 02:31 PM | #92 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,747
|
zukiphile, Given that theory to work with, and with the national exposure this case has (here at least), do we write our Congressperson and ask them to look into impeachment of Judge Kendall?
Granted, I don't qualify as having standing since I live in Texas, but a Federal Judge's actions/decisions aren't simply limited to the district in which they currently serve when dealing with constitutional law, right? Yeah, I'm showing my lack of government 101 retention here.
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......” President John F. Kennedy |
August 31, 2011, 03:41 PM | #93 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
I don't see the judge being impeached anytime soon for failure to support gun rights. The politics work against that happening.
But can't the court of appeals pull the case at some point and issue their own ruling? It seems that remanding and instructing was too deferential for this district court. I predict that whatever the district court does, if anything, will be grossly insufficient; there will be another appeal and this time '7th' will take the bull the horns and resolve this themselves. If I'm right, and there is another appeal, it will be quite clear to the 7th circuit court that no relief from injury is going to be available to the plaintiffs in district court. It is stunning to me that there was no injunction immediately issued. Last edited by maestro pistolero; September 1, 2011 at 10:32 AM. |
August 31, 2011, 05:53 PM | #94 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,747
|
Quote:
If I read everything previously posted correctly, then Judge Kendall has basically refused to follow the orders of superiors. In my job if I do that, I get fired. They call it insubordination. It also occurs the same way in the Armed Forces. Isn't there something similar for judges?
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......” President John F. Kennedy |
|
August 31, 2011, 07:11 PM | #95 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
OK then. I'm going to back up and reiterate what I said earlier and add some fine(r) points, hopefully to clarify my thinking for everyone.
In my fantasy, I see Judge Kendall granting the City's MTD for mootness, the case will be brought back to the 7th Circuit, which will be with the same panel (they are familiar with the case as they have ruled on it once before) as before. That panel will grant the injunction (thereby smacking the living daylights out of the district Judge) and holds the City in contempt. That's not really such a fantasy, at first blush... except for perhaps the contempt charge (but read on).Regardless, the City will respond on 09-12-2011 (it was originally set for 09-06-2011, but the Judge is giving the City an extra week). The Judge will issue her ruling by mail (Minute entry #117, made on 08-17 - this basically strikes her previous Minute entry #116, made on 08-11). In other words, the Judge has automagically given the City more time to file their response, without the City having to request it. This shows bias. There is a reason that Alan Gura did not object to this.My conjecture at this point is that Judge Kendall is not taking the 7th's ruling on the injunction seriously. My reasoning is rather simple. Sixty days will have passed since the 7th mandated that the injunction be applied and this judge is taking all the time in the world to rule on a very, very weak MTD by the defendants, as if there is no injury to the plaintiffs. Contrary to the "irreparable harm" ruling by the 7th Circuit. Hence my "fantasy," above. Here's the deal: Chicago no longer has "clean" hands. As long as they keep playing these type of games, they are essentially making it easier and easier for our side to win where it counts. At the Circuit level. I would actually prefer that Judge Kendall grant the motion for mootness. The 7th has already signaled that they are not going to play nice with Chicago. They will grant and issue the preliminary injunction... At this point, they might make it a permanent injunction. [Supposition-->] They may (it is within their authority) appoint a Special Master to oversee the whole process of allowing gun ranges. That would strip Judge Kendall of any remaining authority in this case (and that is a Judicial back-hand and could conceivably end her career - she gets all the cases no one else wants for as long as she remains on the bench - and yes, that has happened in the past). Regardless, onerous zoning issues will be off the table. Precedent will be set that will affect several other cases. If it happens fast enough, it could very well tip the Supreme Court in its decision to grant cert in Williams and/or Masciandaro (I'm predicting we hear nothing about these cases until just before thanksgiving - plenty of time for all this to happen). Alan Gura is simply sitting back watching both the City and this Judge rip themselves a new one. That is why Gura didn't object to the Judge granting more time to Chicago. It's simply more rope. While frustrating for us, this is actually making his job easier. Regardless of what else is going on, the 7th Circuits decision in Ezell is now solid law in the 7th Circuit. It is also solid, citable and persuasive precedent everywhere else. |
September 1, 2011, 10:28 AM | #96 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,747
|
So what all that told me Al, is that Judge Kendall may get the barrel scrapings for cases after this is said and done. Higher court orders are ignored and salary/retirement checks will still come.
I wonder If I can convince my employer to follow the judicial branch's example in similar situations. I understand that Alan Gura seems to have plans that exploit this situation. However, our tax dollars are still paying that judge and that is grinding my cookies too. Talk about a waste of taxpayer's money.
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......” President John F. Kennedy Last edited by CowTowner; September 1, 2011 at 01:23 PM. |
September 29, 2011, 12:45 AM | #97 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Today, Judge Virginia Kendall denied the motion by the City of Chicago to dismiss the case as moot.
Quote:
I am actually pleased to be wrong in my opinion of Judge Kendall. It does appear that she is following the instructions of the 7th Circuit. Read her order, here. This is excellent news! |
|
September 29, 2011, 10:41 AM | #98 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 11, 2009
Posts: 506
|
Maybe this is a stupid question - I'm a total beginner at this stuff, but this makes me wary:
Quote:
|
|
September 29, 2011, 12:30 PM | #99 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
Judge Kendall has denied Chicago's MTD, which was based on the changed laws at the time the motion was filed. They have since changed even more. What the Judge is saying is that from the Judicial standpoint, when a legislative body changes the law to moot a case, that the Courts will take at face value that the changes are made in good faith. However, the plaintiffs have said that the changes are still in effect, a ban on gun ranges. So the Judge is saying that it is on the plaintiffs to show that while these changes are designed to appear to mitigate the damages, they are still far short of the protections guaranteed by the 2A (as made obvious by the 7th Circuit). She is saying, "Show the court that these guys are just playing games and not acting in good faith." They can do this in one of two ways: (1) challenge the constitutionality of these restrictions by filing an amended complaint as part of this case; or (2) file a new case attacking the same restrictions. This is actually Judge Kendall holding out an olive branch to Alan Gura. The Circuit Court spanked her and she is now going to make nice. I suspect and expect Ezell to file an amended complaint to show in specifics that Chicago is not willing to play nice. Alan Gura can now charge Chicago for this litigation up to the point of the injunction, which will be issued shortly. If he files a new case, then he is back to square one. By continuing this case with an amended complaint, he increases the likelihood of further wins and amount of money he can charge Chicago. There is also the idea that should Mr. Gura prevail and show that Chicago is acting in bad faith, a Special Master can still be appointed by Judge Kendall. Chicago will have to pay for that, also. |
|
September 29, 2011, 12:45 PM | #100 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,299
|
The wheels of justice turn so slowly as to seem frozen in ice...
Thanks for the updates, sir! |
Tags |
alan gura , chicago , ezell v. chicago , rkba , saf , second amendment |
|
|