This is the same appeals court that the supreme court declined to review in the Highland Park appeal.
As I pointed out to you previously. Appeals courts had held up handgun bans too over the years, until the SCOTUS finally took a case and struck them down.
And the courts make up has just changed, Kennedy is no longer on it. So I wouldn’t get too happy just yet.
from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/us/politics/supreme-court-guns-nyc-license.html
Justice Kavanaugh, who replaced the more moderate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy and created a reliable five-member conservative majority, has an expansive view of gun rights. His presence most likely means that the Supreme Court will start exploring and perhaps expanding the scope of the Second Amendment.
And SCOTUS declining to hear a case does not constitute a ruling on the merits or create binding precedent upon that court.
Keep hope alive…
Looks to me like you are the one trying to keep it alive. Now, just imagine if Ginsberg steps down…Hey maybe this will be the appeal the new SCOTUS decides to take on the issue, the last time they declined to hear it, was a different, more liberal, court.
Any rational reading of Heller doesn’t bode well for assault weapon bans. Just sayin
Awww… I don’t have to hope it’s alive, the assault weapons ban is still in place…
The Constitution doesn’t apply in Chicago.
How long was their handgun ban in place? Answer, 28 years. Then what happened?
from McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia
In the 2010 case McDonald v. City of Chicago , Chicago resident Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old (in 2010) retired maintenance engineer, had lived in the Morgan Park neighborhood since buying a house there in 1971.[7] McDonald described the decline of his neighborhood, claiming it was being taken over by gangs and drug dealers. His lawn was regularly littered with refuse and his home and garage had been broken into a combined five times, with the most recent robbery committed by a man McDonald recognized from his own neighborhood.[7] An experienced hunter, McDonald legally owned shotguns, but believed them too unwieldy in the event of a robbery, and wanted to purchase a handgun for personal home defense. Due to Chicago’s requirement that all firearms in the city be registered, yet refusing all handgun registrations after 1982 when a citywide handgun ban was passed, he was unable to legally own a handgun. As a result, in 2008, he joined three other Chicago residents in filing a lawsuit which became McDonald v. Chicago .[7]
Keep whistling past that graveyard and keep that hope alive.
How many of the current Supreme Court justices will still be on the bench in 28 years?
Wrong question. More applicable, what happened to make them take that case after 28 years? A slim conservative majority that just got bigger. Consequently I don’t think we are going to have to wait too long for these assault rifle bans to be struck down, Kennedy just left, I am going to guess they’ll be taking a case in the next year or two.
You expect that majority to hold for the next 28 years?
Mediocre court delays the inevitable.
Tick-tock, Ruth.
There is no requirement they wait 28 years. It took 28 years to strike down the handgun ban because it was a liberal court, that impediment is gone.
Keep hope alive… In the meantime, this assault weapons ban stands…
Yeah…and it’s done so much to reduce the violence in Chicago too…amirite?
They don’t matter.
Of course they matter, and just about everyone knows what would reduce that number… We also know who is preventing those things from happening…
I see that red tip. 
1 Like
Probably trying to avoid being red flagged.
2 Likes
Funny, that’s what they used to say about handgun bans in Chicago.
