Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Who wore it better?
Next Post: After redaction ‘mistake’ by prosecutors, judge strikes recording from record, but won’t declare mistrial
Posted in:
* Tribune…
A downstate judge on Tuesday dismissed a trio of lawsuits brought by a former Republican attorney general candidate challenging Illinois’ sweeping gun ban, citing last week’s state Supreme Court ruling that upheld the law in a separate case.
The outcome was expected after the high court in a 4-3 decision said the ban on an extensive list of high-power semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines does not violate the state constitution’s equal protection clause.
In that case and those brought by attorney Thomas DeVore, the plaintiffs argued the law violated the constitution by creating exemptions for certain trained professionals and for people who owned the now-banned firearms at the time the prohibition took effect, among other issues.
DeVore, who last year ran unsuccessfully for attorney general, said he plans to appeal Tuesday’s lower court ruling. […]
In addition to dismissing the case with prejudice, meaning it can’t be refiled, Jarman vacated temporary restraining orders that had blocked enforcement of the law against more than 150 licensed gun dealers and other entities as well as thousands of individual gun owners who were plaintiffs in the cases.
This matter is taken off advisement. This matter having previously come on for hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, having considered the pleadings, the arguments, and applicable authority, now being more fully advised in the premises, I find and Order as follows: Plaintiffs filed the First Amended Complaint For Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief challenging the constitutionality of the Protect Illinois Communities Act, also known as Public Act 102-1116 or House Bill 5471.
In Count I, Plaintiffs allege the act violates the three reading rule contained in the Illinois Constitution. In Count II, they allege that exceptions to the prohibition of possession, and sale of certain weapons, and devices contained in the act, violate the right to equal protection. Count III seeks a permanent injunction against enforcement based on the grounds alleged in Counts I and II.
Since this court heard arguments on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, the Illinois Supreme Court issued its Opinion in CAULKINS v. PRITZKER, etal. 2023 IL 129453. In that case the Court held that the exemptions contained in the act did not deny equal protection, and went on to say that the Plaintiffs in that case are not similarly situated to the trained professionals to which the exceptions apply. Based on CAULKINS v. PRITZKER, Count II is dismissed with prejudice.
The Court did not address the three reading rule, because the Plaintiffs in that case failed to cross-appeal from the denial of relief on those grounds in the trial court. The Illinois Supreme Court has, however previously held that because of the enrolled bill doctrine upon certification by the Speaker and the Senate President, a bill is conclusively presumed to have met all procedural requirements for passage, including the three readings rule. GEJA’S CAFE, v. METROPOLITAN PIER & EXPOSITION AUTHORITY, 153 Ill. 2d 239, 258-260 (1992). Based on the enrolled bill doctrine, Count I is dismissed with prejudice.
Because both Counts I and II are dismissed with prejudice, there is no underlying claim to pursue, Count III is dismissed with prejudice. Based on the foregoing, The pending Motions to Quash Non Party Subpoena and Motion to Quash Discovery Request are moot and not addressed.
The Temporary Restraining Order previously entered is vacated.
* DeVore’s response…
From the time Dan Caulkins copied and pasted my client’s complaint and filed it as his own and then hastily ran to the Supreme Court woefully unprepared to make a compelling case for gun owners in this state, I raised the strong likelihood that he would lose his case for the exact reasons the Supreme Court ruled. The lack of effort taken by Caulkins and his legal team is why the Court ruled that he had failed to meet their burden. I called it from the beginning. I commend the AG’s office for their skillful defense and ability to get Caulkins to do what they wanted, and I’m sure they are laughing at the naivety and ignorance exhibited by Caulkins.
Having said that, the IL Supreme Court’s decision that Caulkins failed to meet his burden does not bar my clients from being able to proceed to make their case that they are in fact similarly situated to all or part of the exempt class. The decision for dismissal by the circuit court in Effingham county was premature and in error as my clients have a right to make their case. The circuit court dismissed our client’s case without even so much as a hearing on the matter. As such, we will file a motion to reconsider immediately. In the event the motion to reconsider should fail, we will appeal to the Appellate Court and eventually the Supreme Court. We have evidence to prove the exempt class has nothing to do with training and our clients have a right to present it. Moreover, we will not waive our procedural constitutional violation of the three-readings clause, which Caulkins foolishly did, and we will present this argument to the Supreme Court as well.
Sadly, Caulkin’s ineptitude, and desire to have his five minutes of fame, has presently harmed millions of law-abiding gun owners in this state.
Caulkins’ Facebook comments have been bombarded. Click here for the vitriol. Whew.
…Adding… Heh…
Hey @wics_abc20, great story this morning on how Tom DeVore plans to take state’s gun ban to Effingham County court. But Newschannel 20, you didn’t tell viewers the real news: DeVore’s case was already dismissed.
https://t.co/zcZzCK1DNc— Rick Pearson (@rap30) August 17, 2023
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:05 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Who wore it better?
Next Post: After redaction ‘mistake’ by prosecutors, judge strikes recording from record, but won’t declare mistrial
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Where you see vitriol on Dan Caulkins’ Facebook page, Tom DeVore sees a freshly stocked lake filled with billable hours and client fees. Look at ‘em, they’re practically jumpin’ into the boat.
It’s going to be a very Merry Christmas at the DeVore house, filled with, uh, whatever gets written in the Venmo notes.
Comment by Roadrager Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:11 am
Turning on each other.
It’s always interesting that these folks are still marks for a grift even after something like this.
Gonna be a long 17+ months “down there”
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:11 am
Incredibly depressing to see people believe in someone as vacuous and self-centered as Tom DeVore. But also totally unsurprising.
Regardless, these are all adults and entirely responsible for the scam artists they fall in love with.
Comment by Larry Bowa Jr. Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:20 am
I wonder if the woman running to replace him is thinking his endorsement may not be the “win” she thought it would be?
Comment by Frida’s boss Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:24 am
What is staggeringly impressive (or utterly pathetic, you choose) is that DeVore… it’d be like if “Professor” Harold Hill kept going back to the small towns he sold instruments in, where the kids can’t play a note, and he sells these same marks… more instruments… but the strange part isn’t that he can sell them to the marks, it’s that the marks want to buy more instruments.
Televangelists aren’t this efficient, truly.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:33 am
–The Mike Pence of Illinois–
Whew. That’s all I need to know about the mindset exhibited in the FB comments. Scary, these folks are.
Full disclosure: I’m no fan of Pence, but he showed some honor.
Comment by Stix Hix Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:35 am
“Y’all just aren’t prayin’ hard enough, is all”
- The reverend Thomas DeVore
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:39 am
Love “The Music Man” reference!
One of the finest musical comedies of all-time from Meredith Wilson of Mason City, Iowa.
Nonetheless, Caulkins does bear some major responsibility for derailing the legal challenges.
Comment by Gravitas Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:53 am
Still not sure why Caulkins filed a separate lawsuit?
For what it’s worth Devore had the crazy lawsuit lane pretty much taken.
Caulkins opened himself up for no reason and lost the lawsuit just as Devore would have as well.
Comment by Frida’s boss Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:54 am
The headline, Another DeVore loss has been seen so often I have taken to just calling him, DeLoss.
The time has come to simply refer to Thomas DeVore as Thomas DeLoss.
Comment by Onward Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 9:55 am
“… desire to have his five minutes of fame …”
Oh, he doth project too much. (sorry Mr Shakespeare)
Comment by Lurker Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:06 am
Folks have already covered what I want to say about DeVore.
I just got a kick out of Rick Pearson’s Twitter (I refuse to use X) post about Springfield’s TV 20 running the story about DeVore’s lawsuit after it had already been thrown out. Well done by the local right-wing channel.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:07 am
===Sadly, Caulkin’s ineptitude, and desire to have his five minutes of fame, has presently harmed millions===
Kettle, meet pot.
Comment by Suburban Mom Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:25 am
what say you when SCOTUS rules on the AR ban? That Kwame had another loss or that SCOTUS was wrong
Comment by smile politely Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:28 am
smile politely, DeVore has been on a losing streak since the start of covid. It’s unprecedented.
Try not to be so thin-skinned.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:33 am
The day before the Supreme Court’s ruling DeVore was dancing some sort of victory dance. Can’t believe it’s still on his Facebook page.
Comment by Club J Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:48 am
“DeVore has been on a losing streak since the start of covid”
Devore did have a moment of success when the judge in White County granted a TRO. After that, he’s been shutout
Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:49 am
Some of the comments Caulkins’ attorney made about the Court seem sanctionable. You lost, show an iota of class.
Comment by Big Dipper Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 10:54 am
Lest we forget, DeVore also used his retainer fees from the mask lawsuit to pay for a vacation at Mar-a-Lago, so he could take a selfie with Trump in the background. Later by the pool, he took a picture with Giuliani.
All the while, those stolen documents were on the Trump property, probably in the room in the background on the pool picture.
As Bugs Bunny might say, “what a nincompoop” [from the Latin phrase non compos (mentis), meaning “not of sound (mind)].
Comment by H-W Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 11:34 am
Grifting aside, if losing was winning DeVore would be the next Michael Jordan. But it ain’t.
=what say you when SCOTUS rules on the AR ban?=
Well…that depends. If they uphold the ban I will call it a win for sanity and safety.
If they strike it down I will call it corrupt, and rigged, a stolen victory, and unfair…anything else I will have to check the maga talking points to add more.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 11:44 am
I recall a national assault weapon ban that existed before, no?
It expired, if I recall too. Not defeated in the court.
I don’t know what will or even *could* happen at SCOTUS, there’s no settled law anymore, that’s gone. Anything can happen.
I do know DeVore gets to blame Caulkins. That’s fun watching the grifters decide how to handle the marks… those who are vile in words and those who are insane with tossing money towards the 2A televangelists
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 11:49 am
The Judge’s (Jarman)entry is well written.
Short , succinct , easy to read and understand.
Comment by Red Ketcher Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 11:54 am
The national assault weapon ban was allowed to expire after the 1994 Congressional elections in which the GOP gained 54 seats and won control of the House for the first time in almost a half century. The ban on assault weapons was seen as a major factor in Democrat losses.
Comment by Gravitas Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 12:03 pm
Interesting side note on this: McLean County Board Member Chuck Erickson, who was one of the plaintiffs in the DeVore case just announced that’s he’s running for the Caulkins seat against the candidate that Dan is supporting.
Comment by McDem Chair Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 12:11 pm
Pictured together are Brothers Heinie and Doofus Putz. Both are failed candidates for governor and AG in Illinois.
Empty words from empty heads.
Comment by Rudy’s teeth Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 12:35 pm
–That Kwame had another loss or that SCOTUS was wrong.–
Honestly? That Serious Lawyers who care more about their clients and their clients rights then getting their mugs in front of cameras made Constitutional Arguments in the appropriate venue and succeeded. That Grifters like DeVore care more about $ and Attention then their clients or any particular cause.
Unlike most people on this site, I think the ban is Unconstitutional and will fall like Heller & McDonald, however I notice the DeVore wasn’t arguing Constitutionality but other items that let him bill more people and get his pasty mug on TV. If it’s ruled Unconstitutional it covers everyone he doesn’t need $200 retainers from a second group of people and more cameras. Just saying.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 12:42 pm
More Spider Sauce, please…heh.
Comment by Dotnonymous x Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 12:51 pm
= Grifting aside, if losing was winning DeVore would be the next Michael Jordan. But it ain’t. =
Instead he’s the equivalent of the Washington Generals
Comment by cover Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 1:23 pm
Was not surprised at the vitriol.
Gun nuts gonna gun nut.
I did get a great laugh out though of reading the Caulkins was a “Puppet” of Pritzker.
Comment by btowntruth from forgottonia Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 2:49 pm
@ Mason
=== If it’s ruled Unconstitutional it covers everyone he doesn’t need $200 retainers from a second group of people and more cameras. ===
Exactly. I am on the other side, but like you, I find DeVore’s legal practices unconscionable, and in my view, immoral. In the current post, it more than telling that he blames Caulkin for his follow up loss. The Judge said DeVore’s case failed on the same grounds - the State Supreme Court Opinion. Yet DeVore somehow thinks it Caulkin’s fault that the Supreme Court ruled the enrolled bill doctrine takes precedence, and that certain classes of trained citizens should be exempted, not all citizens.
DeVore is a nincompoop. His only talents are filing frivolous lawsuits, inciting foolishness over established law on Facebook, denying that he has an established record as a “bigly” loser in court, and convincing people he alone is their savior.
Comment by H-W Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 2:58 pm
Hey, don’t be dissing the Washington Generals. They had talent. It took talent to be the foils for the Globetrotters.
Comment by Just the Facts Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 3:01 pm
OW –
==I recall a national assault weapon ban that existed before, no?
It expired, if I recall too. Not defeated in the court.
I don’t know what will or even *could* happen at SCOTUS, there’s no settled law anymore, that’s gone. Anything can happen.==
Why do you insist on taking the intellectual lazy lane? The ‘94 law was challenged and never taken up by SCOTUS. Heller didn’t come down till 2008 - 4 years after the ban’s sunset — a ban on mere cosmetic features on rifles sold. you could still buy an AR or AK just not with a folding or collapsible stock or flash hider.
Heller was in 2008, McDonald 2010. you’d be better off citing how after Heller, the Court declined Freidman’s challenge to the Highland Park ban in 2015.
Word is that Alito would not let any gun case come up that they could not guarantee the 5 votes on and Roberts and Kennedy were questionable at the time.
Again the ‘94 law was much different than the Illinois law. grandfather guns could be transferred with few limitations, same withy mags. ARs, AKs and others were readily available during the ban. The TEC-9 went to the AB-10 AB=after ban to comply with the law. No such ability in this case.
We still have the AWB in Cali waiting a decision. We also have the Maryland case waiting a decision from their court of appeals argued in December.
SCOTUS is going to get a semi-auto gun case, I think they will accept it and we will have 3-5 gun rulings possible next year
Anything can happen, I think Cheron will go away and the administrative state will be handcuffed. That will have profound impact on ATF. But settled law is only settled if it agrees with the left’s view of it.
Comment by Todd Thursday, Aug 17, 23 @ 7:42 pm
- Todd -
My friend.
===Why do you insist on taking the intellectual lazy lane?===
It’s still true. There was a ban. It expired, it could’ve been extended. Those are all choices, including choices by any SCOTUS, including this;
===Word is that Alito would not let any gun case come up that they could not guarantee the 5 votes on and Roberts and Kennedy were questionable at the time.===
So, it wasn’t that the law was the worry, it was to manipulate an outcome? That’s why there isn’t any settled law anymore, even to 2A rights.
===But settled law is only settled if it agrees with the left’s view of it.===
Bud, you just made a case that Alito was waiting to find the “right” court to shift Right, did you not?
Hope you’re well. My best, always.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Aug 18, 23 @ 6:50 am
=== The ban on assault weapons was seen as a major factor in Democrat losses. ===
LOL
Comment by Norseman Friday, Aug 18, 23 @ 10:31 am