IT’S WORSE THAN THEY THOUGHT: Vandermyde, GSL, others lay out the breadth of District Court Judge McGlynn’s order from yesterday

Things just got real for the gun grabbers behind the Illinois Firearm Ban Act.  Last Monday we filed for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the new law.  Rest assured though, things have been happening behind the scenes.

As we understand it, both the ISRA/SAF lawyer David Sigale and the NSSF/NRA legal team agreed to give the State of Illinois a 30-day extension.  We objected, but the cases have now been consolidated and the judge granted the extension and by default, we’re all in the same boat now for the time being in terms of timelines.

We thought that was the end of it. And then we got a Valentine’s Day gift a little early.  US District Court Judge Stephen McGlynn issued an order that Kwame and crew aren’t going to like.  The judge ordered Kwame to provide illustrative examples of EACH AND EVERY ITEM BANNED under the Illinois Firearm Ban Act.  By illustrative examples, I take that to mean photographs.  

24 – Feb 13, 2023 – ORDER: Within the response to 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Defendants shall provide illustrative examples of each and every item banned under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 2/13/2023. (jce)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. (Entered: 02/13/2023)

The Center Square covered the news:

(The Center Square) – Three federal lawsuits against Illinois’ gun ban made some movement Monday as a federal judge ordered a response from the state to show “each and every item banned.”

In the Southern District of Illinois, four cases are pending. One is from the Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois. Plaintiffs in that case filed a motion for preliminary injunction last week.

In three other cases, federal Judge Stephen McGlynn ordered state defendants to provide “illustrative examples of each and every item banned” under state law.

Thomas Maag, who brought the state level Crawford County case that was transferred to federal court, said the judge’s order will make it difficult for the state to comply.

“Because the ban is so all encompassing and uses a great many vague terms that I’m not even sure that exactly what is banned and that’s probably why judge McGlynn ordered the state to do that so that we could find out what exactly we are arguing about,” Maag told The Center Square on Monday.

Here’s the problem for Kwame, there are so many variables in the guns listed as well as the more general “features” provisions that this will prove a very challenging endeavor for the AG.  Even for the guns alone, that is a daunting endeavor.

And then there’s the entire issue of guns prohibited in other sections of the law as well.

Oh, but wait, there’s more…  everything that will be banned…  including magazines.

That includes parts.  Like spring kits, parts kits, trigger assemblies, bolt carrier groups, uppers, stocks, even competition items like adjustable stocks.

What’s more, there are all the parts that can make these guns “readily convertible” to scary, prohibited guns.  Kits. 

And then there are the guns that can be “readily converted” like the Remington 870, the Winchester 1300, the Remington 1100 and 1187 and the Mossberg 590 series. 

And on and on.

Are you getting the picture yet?

This is gonna look like a catalog.  And they won’t have even scratched the surface. It’s going to be a poop show when we clap back at their filing and point out page after chapter after volume of items they missed.

And the judge? If you don’t think for a minute that he’s setting Kwame’s clowns up for an epic slapdown, you aren’t thinking this through.

While my/our first impulse is to ask our attorneys to ask for a summary judgement right out of the gate, I know we want to litigate our case to set us up for further filings attacking other unconstitutional laws here in Illinois.

Here’s Todd Vandermyde’s delightful video on the news. Note that big, poop-eating grin on his face.

Tactically speaking, the best thing Gov. Pritzker and the Illinois General Assembly could do is repeal the Illinois Firearms Ban Act and moot this case out. Yeah, that would represent eating a really big crow to the establishment media, the general public and the legislative leaders who ran this bill. And JB Pritzker’s signature campaign piece for his run for President.

If they don’t, then not only are we going to establish the right to keep and bear America’s favorite rifle, but we’re going to establish precedent for magazines, magazine parts, gun parts, transportation issues, and a whole lot more including making guns at home (cough Ghost Guns cough), gun registration, and so much more.

All because the gun grabbers thought they would try to kill off the gun culture.

They were so giddy about this too!

That feeling when YOU BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS in Illinois!! @NabeelaforIL @RepBobMorgan @FightingMama18 #ProtectIllinoisCommunities pic.twitter.com/uB7w5UhZDj

— Rachel Jacoby (@rachelajacoby) January 10, 2023

It’s gonna be fun to watch this unfold.

Here’s a useful post from Maxon Shooter’s…

Judge McGlynn issued the following Order to the defendant in three or four of the cases he has in the Southern District (the dockets haven’t all been updated, but we expect the order to be entered in all four cases):  

Feb 13, 2023 – ORDER: Within the response to 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Defendants shall provide illustrative examples of each and every item banned under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.9. Signed by Judge Stephen P. McGlynn on 2/13/2023. (jce)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. (Entered: 02/13/2023)

This is a huge win and a validation of the FFL-IL ILGRA approach to go after guns and parts in the first suit.  The scope of this ban is so huge as to render most legally-owned firearms illegal or un-repairable.

-de

—

We will not be addressing the various county court cases that have resulted in Temporary Restraining Orders for the named plaintiffs as they do not apply to all IL residents.

We are looking to receive injunctive relief while these cases are litigated.

That relief (Preliminary Injunction) would prevent the State from enforcing the “Assault Weapons” Ban until the cases are decided. We are confident of obtaining that relief because of the four tests:

1. Is the plaintiff likely to succeed on the merits? YES
   • Court Precedent is on our side.
   • The Supreme Court remanded back to the lower courts similar laws last summer
2. Is the plaintiff likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief? YES
   • No Parts = No ability to repair
   • No Purchase = no ability to lawfully possess
   • Right to possess implies right to purchase (IL Firearms Retailers vs Chicago 2014)
   • Retailers may lose their businesses, and employees their jobs, while this is being litigated
3. The balance of equities favors plaintiff? YES, but it doesn’t matter
   • Balance of equities is how a court determines which side will prevail
   • Example: public benefit versus individual hardship
   • Bruen discarded that sort of interest-balancing last summer
4. The injunction is in the public interest? YES
   • It protects the lawful behavior covered by the second amendment.

Several of the cases, including the FFL-IL v Pritzker which we are involved in, have been assigned to Judge Stephen P. McGlynn. The cases right now are consolidated but not combined, which means each will be argued separately, possibly on the same days. Generally the timing will be for a hearing to determine the preliminary injunction in late March or Early April.

The cases: 

Harrel v Raoul January 17, 2023

• Plaintiffs: Second Amendment Foundation, Illinois State Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition
• Scope: Guns, Mags Illinois AWB
• Court: Us District Court for the Southern District of Illinois Judge McGlynn
• Status: Plaintiff Motion for Preliminary Injunction; Defense Motion for Extension of Time and Overlength Response Granted.
• Next Action: Response by Defendants March 1; hearing on MPI likely late March or early April

---

Langley et al v Kelly. Thomas Maag January 13, 2023

• Plaintiffs: Various Individuals
• Scope: State Constitution Procedural Issues on how the Act was passed; Federal 2^nd 5^th and 14^th amendment issues
• Court: Circuit Court Crawford County.  Elevated to District Court for Southern District Judge McGlynn
• Status: Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer and Respond to MPI granted.
• Next Action: Response by Defendants February 28; hearing likely late March or early April

---

Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois v Pritzker January 24, 2023

• Plaintiffs: Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, Guns Save Life, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation
• Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois Judge McGlynn
• Scope: Guns, Parts
• Status: Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed February 6, 2023
• Next Action: Defendants will respond, ask for more time. Expect response by early March. Hearing late March or Early April.

---

Barnett v Raoul January 24, 2023

• Plaintiffs: National Shooting Sports Foundation
• Court: Us District Court for the Southern District of Illinois Judge McGlynn
• Scope: Guns, Mags
• Status: Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer and Respond to MPI granted.
• Next action: Response by Defendants by March 2; Hearing likely late March or Early April

---

Kenneally v Raoul January 27, 2023

• Plaintiffs: McHenry County State’s Attorney Patrick Kenneally
• Scope: Enforcement of unconstitutional act
• Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
• Status: ?
• Next Action: ?

---

National Association for Gun Rights et al v Naperville September 7, 2022

• Plaintiff: Law Weapons Naperville, IL
• Scope: Naperville AWB for sales and Illinois AWB Guns, Mags, Parts
• Court: US District Court for the Northern District Judge Kendall
• Status: Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed; local and Law Weapons only
• Next Action: Expect a ruling by mid February