Illinois (ECWd) –
After the Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court issued its ruling on the gun ban Temporary Restraining Order case, the mainstream media and national news went to print and airways with factually incorrect information. That information may well get people in trouble if they were to act on the false information as it relates to the gun ban legislation the Governor signed into law on January 10, 2023.
Fox News – “After an appeal from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Illinois’ Fifth District appellate court ruled on Tuesday in a 2-to-1 decision that the temporary restraining order can stay in place, and also extends it statewide. Previously, the temporary restraining order only applied to the plaintiffs.” (emphasis added)
Fox 32 Chicago Headline – “CHICAGO – An appellate court has upheld a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against Illinois’ assault weapons ban, and expanded it to cover the entire state.” (emphasis added)
There is nothing in the court’s ruling that expanded the TRO to cover the entire state. Outside of the exempt groups found in the gun ban law, the only others included in the TRO are those who were named in the actual case before the court.
What the ruling does do is establish what all other courts in the state must follow if a similar case is before them. For example, if someone in Rockford, Illinois wanted to file an identical case as the one filed in Effingham the court in Rockford would have to follow what the Fifth District ruled on.
Anyone who thinks they are exempt based on the news media misinformation and sells or buys the weapons outlined in the law they may well find themselves getting arrested and facing a felony crime and jail time.
After speaking with Tom DeVore, the attorney who brought the case before the courts in Effingham, he confirmed the above information as accurate.
Anyone who happened to see Governor Pritzker on CNN recently claiming the first offense in the gun ban bill would be a fine and the second offense a felony needs to know that was also totally false. We will cover that matter in an upcoming article.
4 Comments
Frank Miller
Posted at 11:00h, 03 Februaryhttps://jm919846758.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/rlilt.pdf
From p219, 44. Artificial-Person Canon
The word ‘person’ includes corporations and other entities, but not the
sovereign.
Traditionally the word ‘person’—as well as whoever—denotes not only natural
persons (human beings) but also artificial persons such as corporations,
partnerships, associations, and both public and private organizations. Though
surprising to nonlawyers, this legal meaning is age-old.
And the word ‘person’ traditionally excludes the sovereign. There exists a
“longstanding interpretive presumption” to that effect. The Supreme Court of
the United States once explained the presumption as follows: “Since, in common
usage, the term ‘person’ does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the
[term] are ordinarily construed to exclude it.” That explanation is not entirely
adequate: In common usage, after all, person does not include artificial persons
as well. So common usage is not the standard here. Legal usage is—and in this
instance its treatment of the word person is peculiar.”
(5 ILCS 100/1-60) (from Ch. 127, par. 1001-60)
Sec. 1-60. “Person” means any individual, partnership, corporation, association, governmental subdivision, or public or private organization of any character other than an agency.
Talk about misleading information …
Frank Miller
Posted at 16:47h, 02 FebruaryThe ruling violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.
Dave
Posted at 12:13h, 01 FebruarySo true, I have read 4 different versions of the “truth” after the Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court issued its ruling on the gun ban Temporary Restraining Order case. Thanks for the follow-up ECW
Kathiann
Posted at 11:55h, 01 FebruaryBecause words MEAN something!!!! But most people don’t believe it or go by it, and the media doesn’t care. They just want to get the story out there FIRST. There is no absolute with these people.