|
Spanishjames, your fears are premature and largely unfounded (don't be confused, I'm not saying your fear is unreal). Consider:
Richards v. Prieto --> 9th Circuit <-- Challenges arbitrary "May Issue" law.
Peruta v. San Diego Cnty --> 9th Circuit <-- Challenges arbitrary "May Issue" law.
Peterson v. Garcia --> 10th Circuit <-- Challenges permit system that doesn't allow visitors (non-residents) to carry.
Kachalsky v. Cacase --> US District Court (USD) for So. N.Y. <-- Challenges "May Issue" laws.
Mishaga v. Monken --> USD Central IL <-- Similar to Peterson, but different because of IL FOID and non-issuance to visitors.
Woolard v. Sheridan --> USD Maryland <-- Challenges arbitrary "May Issue" law.
Muller v. Maenz --> USD New Jersey <-- Challenges arbitrary "May Issue" law.
Smith v. Nelson --> USD S. Dakota <-- Challenges non-issuance to Resident Aliens. Win. Injunction Issued.
Fletcher v. Haas --> USD Mass. <-- Same as Smith, above.
Osterweil v. Bartlett --> USD No. N.Y. <-- Challenges licensing of non-residents.
Scocca v. Smith --> USD No. CA. <-- Equal Protection in licensing of similarly situated indiviuals.
Masciandaro v. US --> Seeking Cert <-- Does 2A apply outside the doorstep.
Williams v. Maryland --> Seeking Cert <-- Does 2A apply outside the home when permitting system is so arbitrary as to deny regular citizens.
This is just the list of cases that will directly affect how IL goes.
If either of the two cases seeking cert are granted, all other cases will win. "May Issue" will be a thing of the past. All States will have to allow some form of carry, that is not arbitrary or capricious in nature.
Winning any of the other cases first, will provide persuasive precedent for any of the rest, as regards arbitrary "May Issue" licensing/permitting... In other words, "May Issue" will become virtual "Shall Issue."
|