Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Cook Cty States Attorney office says not they aren't bound by Federal Court

Discussion in 'Gun-Control Issues' started by WarCry, Feb 19, 2013.

  1. No links at the moment, it's happening live in the Judiciary Committee hearings on CCW in Springfield.

    A representative from the Cook County States Attorney's office said that ONLY the Illinois Supreme Court has the authority to declare state laws unconstitutional. He claimed that the 7th Circuit can only issue an "advisory opinion" and is not binding. He went on to declare that, if no legislation was passed and the deadline passed, the Cook County States Attorney would continue to prosecuted under the barred law.

    The first representative to speak to the issue was one of the hard-core anti-gun Chicago Democrats. He warned the States Attorney's office to tread very, VERY carefully on declaring that they won't be bound by Federal courts.

    This could turn into a MUCH bigger fight than just concealed carry.
  2. Good luck with that. In the early 60s some states tried that argument about busing. They Feds told them to comply or they would send troops. Then Gov. Wallace complied

  3. Still no transcript located. Here's a video of the from the entire hearing. The Cook County State's Attorney rep starts at 2:16:25.

    A few quotes:
    "The federal decision in Moore vs Madigan is NOT currently the law in Illinois"

    Reference to 2 IL Supreme Court rulings (I think I missed the proper names, can't find the cases right off the bat)

    General rules is that the opinions of federal and circuit courts are not binding on state courts - Chicago v Rothman (sp?)

    Until the US Supreme Court rules, state courts are not precluded from exercising their own judgement on the constitutionality of laws. Lower federal courts have no appellate jurisdiction over state courts decisions People vs Harris

    It's a very interesting stance they're taking, and I think it says it all that the representatives that are ADAMANTLY against CCW and any gun rights are some of the voices telling this guy "Hold up, wait, what??"
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2013
  4. Gunnut 45/454

    Gunnut 45/454

    Jun 20, 2002
    Well under a normal Presidencey that might be the case -but since we have the most Anti -COTUS admin , Anti 2nd Amendment admin you will not see any Federal action! Holder will not act! In fact I'd say he'd go against the Federal court!:steamed:
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2013
  5. Dawolf


    Sep 18, 2010
    Lift leg, and pee on the constitution once again in Chi-commie-cago.
  6. jpa

    jpa CLM

    May 28, 2001
    Las Vegas NV
    Did they take the video down? Your link is missing.
  7. Jakestir

    Jakestir Rah

    Feb 16, 2013
    North central IL
  8. TK-421


    Oct 12, 2012
    Pflugerville, TX
    Doesn't surprise me. If other states can say they're not bound by federal law, and will legalize pot, or will not obey a federal assault weapons ban, why can't a county do the opposite, and say they'll go by the laws that are already on the books, instead of letting those laws be destroyed?
  9. No, that would be my fault for being stupid and in a rush to get it posted yesterday:

    Sorry about that...

    Note: I was looking at this, and it looks like they've edited the video, so the time-marks may be off a bit.
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2013
  10. I am a lawyer, licensed in Illinois and California. The Cook County State's Attorney is wrong. It is remarkable he passed the bar exam.
  11. Gunnut 45/454

    Gunnut 45/454

    Jun 20, 2002
    Well when the crooks run the bar they let anyone who pleases them through! Thugcago has had there system in place since the thirties. Coruption run by the corupt!:faint: