View Single Post
Old October 19, 2011, 01:25 PM   #126
Al Norris
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,550
Yesterday, the plaintiffs in Ezell filed their response to Chicago's objections to the Preliminary Injunction.

That 8 page brief is here.

It is plain to see that Alan Gura is running out of patience and is tiring of the constant games that the City is playing.

Plaintiffs do not have to prove, at this stage, that they will absolutely prevail in proving the challenged provisions effectuate a complete ban and/or unconstitutional infringement on gun ranges. Plaintiffs have to establish only a likelihood of success on the merits of their claims, which include that the challenged provisions go too far in restricting Second Amendment rights. The other prongs—irreparable harm, the public interest, and the balance of harms—are not even addressed in the City’s objections.

Respectfully, the challenged provisions should be preliminarily enjoined as set forth in the proposed Order. If the City wishes to litigate its burden of proving that the laws are not unconstitutional, it is of course free to move for summary judgment.
If Gura gets his PI, then this would most likely forestall an Ezell II, which seems to be where Chicago wants to go. The City has until 10-25-2011 to file a reply to this response.
Al Norris is offline  
Page generated in 0.03356 seconds with 7 queries