Ammoland
Right to keep and bear arms advocates will have to wait a bit longer to learn if the Supreme Court will hear a challenge to an Illinois city’s ban on certain semiautomatic firearms and standard capacity magazines. Per SCOTUSblog, the case has been relisted again (although the Proceedings and Orders list has not yet been updated at this writing).
“[D]on’t give up hope just yet, Second Amendment aficionados,” attorney John P. Elwood writes about the delayed decision. “Friedman v. City of Highland Park, 15-133, stuck around for its third re-list.”
“Re-list”? Again, per SCOTUSblog’s “Frequently Asked Questions”:
When a case is “relisted,” that means that it is set for reconsideration at the Justices’ next Conference. Unlike a hold, this will show up on the case’s electronic docket. A relist can mean several things, including the fairly straightforward prospect that one or more Justices wants to take a closer look at the case; that one or more Justices is trying to pick up enough votes to grant review (four are needed); that the Justices are writing a summary reversal (that is, a decision that the lower court opinion was so wrong that the Court can decide the case on the merits without briefing or oral argument); or that one or more Justices are writing a dissent from the decision to deny review.
I often wonder what the result would have been if Moore vs. Madigan had gone to SCOTUS. After they lost their appeal, the powers that be in Illinois were vowing to appeal to the highest court. However, the legislature took it upon themselves to pass a shall-issue permit system. Perhaps they decided that it was better to take one for the team than to risk the potential for another court decision that could affect citizens carrying in public nation-wide.
ReplyDeletePerhaps they decided that it was better to take one for the team than to risk the potential for another court decision that could affect citizens carrying in public nation-wide.
ReplyDeleteI'm convinced that's exactly what happened, SSG.