Originally Posted by kcbrown
Ezell is not an example of a court swallowing a bitter pill. The 7th Circuit ruled in our favor in that case. It does not conflict with my previous statements.
Perhaps I need to be more explicit. The 7th Circuit's decision in McDonald
(not to mention Chicago's laws) indicate that the 7th Circuit is not a friend of the RKBA. Nevertheless, following McDonald
, the 7th Circuit issued the Ezell
opinion, which is much less antagonistic to the RKBA. As you say, it ruled in favor of the RKBA. By issuing that order -- an order that is inconsistent with the perceived inclinations of the 7th Circuit -- the 7th Circuit swallowed a bitter pill
. It did something it did not like -- it ruled in favor of the RKBA. In other words, Ezell
is evidence for the proposition that, in the context of the RKBA, federal courts are able to put aside personal feelings.