So now Illinois State Police can just ignore Federal Courts?


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/illinois-state-police-say-assault-weapons-purchased-during-injunction-will-be-illegal/ar-AA1aX2mI


https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_1936b016-eddf-11ed-bd23-6bc2a2d3a50e.html




and any firearm picked up during the ban, would have to have an approval by the State Police in the first place?

They are simply sticking to the Jan 10 date for the grandfather clause that's in the law. Gotta wait to see if the law is struck down. They followed the courts and allowed the sales for 6 days.


Seen a couple of Lawyers mention 5th amendment issues, so possibly more law suit against the state if nothing happens before Jan 1, 2024.

They are CHOOSING to stick to the grandfather clause.  I don't think this will hold water as when a law is injunctionated it is like it never happened, so their glumming on to that aspect is willful disregard of the judges rule and would not hold up in future court.  This ISP is the worst we have seen.  They are blindly following the democrat's commands.  All integrity seems to be gone in this state and replaced with democrats.

ISP are pritzkers storm troopers. Are you really surprised that they would follow his orders?

While the above are good points, there's a more important point here ...

2A is licensed FEDERALLY and each purchase is checked FEDERALLY so compliance enforcement decisions occur - yup, FEDERALLY. Which means the ISP has CHOSEN to enforce compliance of a state law in violation of a federal law.

Let this sink in - we need not debate the *potential* for local LE to violate their oath. They have. Let me be very clear - the ISP is already the illegal Law Enforcement entity we often conject that we might have to defend against.

Yes, they can and they will continue to do so even if SCOTUS stops the stay.  We have to follow the rules, they do not.

Sorry deleted by me I apologize and I was very pissed when I wrote my previous comments. My apologies and didn't mean to offend or insult anyone.

The ISP are not interpreting the AWB law.  They do not have the authority.  The Illinois Attorney General is telling state agencies what to say when inquiries are made.

The AG's comments are no surprise.  The AWB exempts firearms purchased before January 1, 2023, not purchased during the short period of time the injunction was in effect.  Firearm rights groups need to read things carefully before giving us false hope.  People in charge of those groups need to confirm information before disseminating it to the public and not voice their personal opinions.

One of the men I shoot with is an attorney and he predicted the stay to the injunction issued by the 7th Circuit before it happened.

We have a long fight ahead of us and the Democrats will fight us every step of the way.

I'm a lawyer not your lawyer.  I would not be making purchases even during an injunction.

The injunction prevents enforcement while the injunction is in effect.  The injunction i saw does not say the law is invalid or void while the injunction is in effect, just it can't be enforced.

If the law is later ruled valid and the injunction is lifted they will say you violated the law, they were merely prevented from enforcing it temporarily.

I'm a party to the Devore suit.  I understand his position, but as a lawyer you don't put your client in jeopardy unless you have clearly explained the risks. IMO he has not.  If the state wins and the SP go after purchases made during the injunction he is probably going to be on the hot seat.

(I did not read the federal injunction just the one in Devores case.  I assume the federal injunction said much the same thing.)

Read makintrax73's post carefully, then read it again.  I think he hit the nail on the head.

Another point to the AWB that the Democrats should consider.  People who pay taxes are already fleeing the state.  Lately, I've overheard a few people who said they are actively seeking real estate in free states like Texas and Missouri.  That will be an additional loss of tax revenue.

All you conservative gun owners should just come over by me if you can seeing everyone else from Illinois is. Unfortunately most of the ones coming are progressive dipshits.NWI is pretty much all demoshits now.

I am a Devore plaintiff too.  What would be Tom's error?  That he advised us to buy banned items during the Freedom week?  He is not the only one who said this.  

BTW, there is a theory that Easterbrook will let us win, otherwise it goes to SCOTUS, anti's know we will win there, and the entire nation must follow the ruling.  NO AWB anywhere.  If the 7th rules for us it only applies in the 7th circuit.  So Tom's losing does not worry me.  What worries me is a future where the anti's pack the SCOTUS.  That and I think Pritzker will ignore any adverse ruling and enforce it anyway.  I always expect the worst, therefore I am either proven right or pleasantly surprised.

This crazy situation is unreal.  So, the injunction effectively undoes the law while in effect.  Just like it was the day before it passed.  But, the democrat ISP is saying you have to sign an affidavit stating you owned these arms before original passage.  It will be like forced confession to a unlawful premise.  The law would have to be ruled "constitutional" for this to be an issue and then it would be a pretty easy argument to undo in court.  Plus...I don't see any reasonable county State's Atty. or Sheriff allowing any action on this aspect of the law.

Yes, but ONLY while the injunction is in effect.  If the final judgement is that the law is valid then the law goes back into effect just as it was the day it was passed.  Without a permanent injunction at the end of the road the ISP is free, and possibly will, enforce the law as written.  Meaning any verboten items purchased after passage of the law are contraband.





Plenty of people claimed the earth is flat.  Those people had authority.  The fact that multiple people said it doesn't change my opinion.

Hear me out on this:  If you are a lawyer you tell your client what they can and cannot do under the law.  BUT you also tell them when a course of action is likely to lead them into legal jeopardy EVEN IF YOU THINK THEY WILL WIN IN COURT.  Why?  Because lawyers and courts are expensive as hell.  Because for the average working person facing the prospect of criminal prosecution is a level of pressure and anxiety they might not be able to handle and keep their life together.

If the law is eventually ruled constitutional and valid what do you suppose will happen?  Do you really think Pritzger and his minions will conclude that purchases made during the injunction were a free for all?  Or might they come back and track those purchases and say turn them in or face prosecution? My guess is the later.  I don't want that heat on me, and if I were DeVore I wouldn't want that heat on my clients.

I think many people do not understand the difference between an injunction and a final court ruling.  The injunction is temporary until the final court ruling is issued.  The final ruling may be contrary to the injunction.

I think many people do not understand that the person with the authority to issue the legal interpretation of The Protect Illinois Communities Act is the Illinois Attorney General until the courts rule otherwise.

The Illinois Attorney General gives legal guidance to state agencies that perform administrative and enforcement functions.  Those agencies are required to disseminate the opinion of the Attorney General when questioned about a controversial statute such as The Protect Illinois Communities Act.

I hate this anti-American legislation as much as, or more than anyone else.  Right now my focus is on the courts and the legislature.  If the courts rule the legislation is constitutional, that will be when my focus will shift to administrative and enforcement agencies.  If we scatter our focus, we will not be effective in fighting this legislation.  The courts and the legislature need our full attention at this point in time.

Those who followed the advice of some of the spokespersons of firearm rights organizations when injunctions were issued thought the injunctions made the law completely invalid, they did not.  I can understand their frustration, but I am not surprised at the outcome.

After watching patterns of fights for motorcycle and firearm rights for over 40 years, you gain a certain perspective.  I lived through this when we successfully fought, and eventually defeated, the Illinois Motorcycle Safety Helmet Law and other legislation that oppressed the motorcycle community.  The first step toward winning the fight is to educate yourself on how the system works.

If another injunction is issued in our favor, there is no way on earth I am going to try to purchase any of the prohibited firearms listed in The Protect Illinois Communities Act.  In my humble opinion, I believe I would be inviting trouble for myself.

If you have a TRO, just stick to buying parts/uppers. Stuff that doesn't need a back ground check.

Choose companies that would tell IL to pound sand if IL asked for sale records/etc. Or pay cash idk.

It's cute they expect you turn turn in parts/accessories come January lmao. Good luck with that.

In this age, I would think any government agency would have the ability to track internet sales.  The Illinois Department of Revenue should have this ability.

Hypothetically speaking, if I needed parts I would buy them face to face with the vendor and pay cash.

What were my other choices again?  Oh yeah, bendover.