You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Chicago motion to dismiss gun law case denied - More Backlash To Come [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
DonP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-29-11 02:06 PM
Original message
Chicago motion to dismiss gun law case denied - More Backlash To Come
Advertisements [?]
Chicago tried to "get cute" (per the judge) and changed it's gun range laws again, the same day they lost the Ezell case. They moved for a motion to dismiss the entire case since they "changed" their laws and basically stall the review process for a few more months and get another judge that might be more "Daley friendly".

The judge said "no" ... probably because saying "no fuckin way" wouldn't be dignified in court proceedings.

<snip>

In Ezell - Chicago's New Range Ordinance Doesn't Moot Case

Another win for Rhonda Ezell and the team of Alan Gura and David Sigale.

Full text here: http://ia600507.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.ilnd.246475/gov.uscourts.ilnd.246475.122.0.pdf

In a decision released today, Judge Virginia Kendall said that despite the rewriting of the Chicago Gun Range Ordinance, it doesn't moot the case and denied the City of Chicago's motion to dismiss the case.
Though the Court cannot conclude that the new ordinance is the same as the old without further litigation, as the Supreme Court did in Northeastern Florida, it is consistent with that case not to dismiss the instant litigation as moot and instead to let the parties litigate the issue of whether the new ordinance is a de facto ban on firing ranges or so burdensome as to infringe on Chicagoan’s Second Amendment rights.

Moreover, as a practical matter, Ezell is either going to: (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. The Court sees no upside in making the parties start over with another judge who has less familiarity with the issues and facts of the case than this Court.
She then set Friday, September 30th as the deadline for the parties to submit an agreed proposed injunction order or separate proposed injunction orders if they cannot agree. The plaintiffs have until October 15th to submit an amended complaint which her attorneys have indicated they will doing. Finally, she set a status hearing for October 26th.

<snip>
Refresh | +14 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC