Rham Emanuel moving to moot Ezell v. Chicago

[yellowfin]

Gotta go Corvette. It's as American as the Second Amendment.

I wouldn't trust anybody who drives a Benz. :P

Benz are made in Alabama now so it's part of the new American auto style, higher quality and 100% free of unions and gov't bailouts. That's REAL American freedom.

[Scarecrow Repair]

Gotta go Corvette. It's as American as the Second Amendment.

I wouldn't trust anybody who drives a Benz. :P

-Brandon

Good thing you and Gene don't carpool!

[taperxz]

He's more a convertible guy. I'm thinking he's heading this way:



-Gene

Forget the car, I think he is looking at the beach front property!

[Quser.619]

I agree it's to cut off the legs of the case, but whose to say that they actually have to build a range. They can say that no one qualified has obtained the necessary permits. Though can you imagine the amount of money one can make being the only legal range for the city of Chicago?

[yellowfin]

^ Which of course could make it an item for political patronage and we're right back @ Slaughterhouse.

[Chicago]

No surprise here ...

Last Friday (29-JUL-11) Chicago did, indeed, file "Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Case as Moot". A hearing is scheduled for Monday 15-AUG-11 at 9am.

[Stonewalker]

Never thought I would miss Mr. Daley. At least he was dogmatic and stupid, if a major PITA.

[OleCuss]

I'd bet the case is ruled moot, but note the footnote which suggests the City Council is still addressing issues related to the case? That suggests to me that the city is still not in full compliance with the spirit of the Ezell ruling and thus leaves the door open for saying that the issue is not yet moot.

Timing may prove of interest.

[Untamed1972]

Wow....glad someone revived this thread.....I hadnt seen it before. I was out of town and out of touch the week it was posted.

So let me ask a dumb question......other then not getting a ruling from the court regarding bear/carry outside the home, which the grant of injuction from the appeals court, at least acknowledged exists to some degree in stating that the right/abilty to train outside the home is impliciate in the 2A.....how is this a bad thing?

I mean....ultimately isn't this what we want? Dont we want various gov't entities to get with the program and change their stupid laws when it's clear they are in the wrong and will lose? I think that's the message the appeals court was sending them, especially with the comment about the "legislative thumbing of the nose at the courts". They basically told Chicago to fold because they were going to lose if they pushed it.

So yes....I see the set back in the lost of invested time in this case hoping for a ruling. But doesn't the appeals courts ruling on the injuction and Chicago's rapid repeal of their ordinance send just as strong a message to other gov't entities about the direction things are heading? That perhaps alot of trouble could be saved by correcting matters when a preltigiation letter is issued? And that the old "The 2A is meaningless, we can do what we want based on phantom concerns of public safety" doesn't play anymore and you're gonna hafta to come to the table with more then that from now on.

[Maestro Pistolero]

Unless they are in full compliance Gura will eviscerate them for toying with the court. The court is not stupid. They know when someone is yanking their chain.

[Untamed1972]

Unless they are in full compliance Gura will eviscerate them for toying with the court. The court is not stupid. They know when someone is yanking their chain.

Well after the comment about the "legislative thumbing of the nose at the courts" I would think Chicago would be pretty stupid to try such chain yanking again. But then again.....they were stupid enough to try it the first time so anything is possible I guess. But I would think that after that statement from the court they would realize that anything they profer is going to be gone thru with a fine tooth comb.

[PCPerks]

I'm curious to know if this a move by Chicago to prevent them from officially losing since they probably realized it was inevitable, and therefore not having to pay for the plaintiff's legal costs. That could be a pretty big hit in the wallet.

[OleCuss]

Untamed1972:

This is not an unmitigated disaster by any stretch of the imagination. It does, indeed, show other government entities that even a big, influential government entity with access to lots of money will eventually have to kiss the nether regions of Gura/SAF/CGF/CRPA/NRA. It also shows that the logic of Ezell is too good to even bother appealing to SCOTUS - that doesn't help in court but should help politically.

The other thing that has now happened is that Ezell has now been cited in at least Nordyke's petition for a re-hearing and (IIRC) in at least one petition for writ of certiorari (I think that's the term) before SCOTUS.

So far as I can tell, that means that the most essential language of Ezell is effectively preserved even if the case itself is mooted and/or de-published.

This means that Ezell is now somewhat durable.

So far as I can tell, it would still be preferable if Chicago were stubbornly stupid and intransigent because that would mean that there would likely be additional case law made based on Ezell - and the case law would likely be overall beneficial to the RKBA.

Little benefit, however, to the citizens of Chicago from having the case mooted. If it is not mooted the district court would likely have to interpret Ezell rather broadly and that would probably mean freer access to ranges within Chicago than will likely occur under the current/new ordinances.

FWIW from a non-lawyer.

[wash]

It looks like Rahm is just trying to get out of paying the bill.

A very weasly thing to do given that they deposed the witnesses so long to try and get SAF to drop the case.

If he is successful, that means the antis can bankrupt our civil rights movement just by passing enough laws that we have to challenge and then mooting them before they have to pay legal fees.

I hope that the judges don't fall for his dirty tricks.

[proclone1]

This all assumes that the Chicago folks aren't too stupid and obstinate to enact it AND our side isn't smart enough to counter with pointing out that it can and will be implemented in an arbitrary and deliberately inhibiting manner.

I thought the majority of Chicago is a fairly liberal (and anti) crowd who basically drinks up the political koolaid, and once in awhile burns the political pariah (blagojevich) to say "hey look we're fighting corruption!"