The Illinois Attorney General filed 3585 pages of exhibits and arguments in their defense of Illinois’ so-called Protect Illinois Communities Act gun and magazine ban Monday.  This ahead of the deadline for final briefs from federal judge Stephen McGlynn.  3585 pages.  Think about that.

3585 pages.  What a waste of perfectly good trees.

It’s truly astounding.   So much so that Mr. Four Boxes Diner – Mark Smith – did a video on it.

Smith points out how Kwame Raoul is trying to get the court to redefine the Heller and Bruen decisions.  He’s also trying to coax the courts to once again add an “interest balancing” test to Second Amendment cases like this one.

But when you’re out of good arguments, you’re left with throwing a lot of excrement against the wall to get some of it to stick.  And 3585 pages is a lot of fecal matter.

Smith spends a lot of time mocking Kwame’s repeated use of “unprecedented” in their filing for things that were unprecedented.

Here’s their laughable State’s Proposed Conclusions of Law.

Here’s the filings from our side.

Click to access 2024-10-21-Plaintiffs-Opp-to-State-Defendants-Mtn-to-Bar-Opinions-of-Plaintiffs-Experts2307991.1.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-Plaintiffs-Opp-to-Defendants-Mtn-to-Preclude-Consideration-of-William-English-NSSF-Surveys2307992.1.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-Exhibit-A-to-Plaintiffs-Opp-to-Defendants-Mtn-to-Preclude-Consideration-of-William-English-NSSF-Surveys2307993.1.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-Exhibit-B-to-Plaintiffs-Opp-to-Defendants-Mtn-to-Preclude-Consideration-of-William-English-NSSF-Surveys2307994.1.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-Exhibit-C-to-Plaintiffs-Opp-to-Defendants-Mtn-to-Preclude-Consideration-of-William-English-NSSF-Surveys2307995.1.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-Plaintiffs-Proposed-Findings-of-Fact-Conclusions-of-Law2307998.2.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-Addendum-to-Plaintiffs-Proposed-Findings-of-Fact-Conclusions-of-Law2307999.2.pdf

Click to access 2024-10-21-FFL-Plaintiffs-Findings-of-Fact-Conclusions-of-Law-re-Registration-Repair2308005.1.pdf

There.  You’re up to date.  Pour yourself about sixteen fingers of your favorite libation and happy reading.  You might pop some Zofran before you begin reading the State’s filing.

 

 

 

 

 

One thought on “3,585 PAGES: Illinois files reams of dead trees to prop up the indefensible gun ban law ahead of judge’s decision”
  1. I’m struggling through the conclusions of law. It is puerile and juvenile and its reasoning. It seems overly repetitive in that they’re saying AR-15s are M16s [I will confess I did not know that when Stoner introduced the AR-15 it was used in military service under that designation. That’s news to me. But that doesn’t change the fact that it’s not now.]

    I sure hope that when the Supreme Court gets this case it has a chance to undo Heller’s dicta about arms only being used for self-defense. We all know that the primary reason for the implementation of the second amendment was the overthrow of tyrannical government. I would like to hear that said out loud instead of just dancing around it and pretending that the Second Amendment is only about self-defense.

    I also want to add that the lawyers on our side are absolutely amazing they are articulate and learned and persuasive. Thanks to gun save life for participating in this and to all of the other organizations for sticking up for our rights. And thanks JB for posting links to everything so we can read it ourselves without doing all the grunt work!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *