[JonnyB]

Over at packing.org there's a poster who claims that the injunction was made 'permanent' by Judge Ohmer. Anyone confirm or dispute tjis?

JB

[chrisinmo]

I have not been able to find anything yet. I would love to see the reasoning behind this. It took him 2 1/2 weeks to make his original decision. I can not imagine he can actually provide legitamate case law backing this position. I wonder if he has also ruled thet judges adn police officers are "not citizens" and are not covered by the constitution as teh antis are claiming?

Newest info:

1/7/03) St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Ohmer asked attorneys for all
parties in the lawsuit to assemble in the courtroom at high noon. Judge
Ohmer handed down a ruling on the Temporary Injunction blocking the
implementation of the new License To Carry (LTC) law in Missouri. The
judge made the Temporary Injunction Permanent. He did this based on the
Article I Section 23 issue. We will be appealing to the MOSC. More to
follow as soon available. Do not call me as I need to keep the phone lines
open to talk to the lawyers.

This from the moccw.org mailing list. It is on to the Supreme Court.

[MessedUpMike]

Just caught this on Fox news:
Mo. judge overturns CCW laws on grounds it is unconstitutional. Says state "Right to bear arms does not apply to the concealed carrying of weapons"

Can he do that?

[Standing Wolf]

Can he do that?

Who's going to stop him?

[Jeff White]

The Missouri Attorney General has not announced if he will appeal the decision....Can anyone besides the AG appeal?

Jeff

[revlar]

There's no doubt the AG will appeal the decision - he really has little choice. His job is to pursue the implementation and enforcement of state law - and he will. In spite of his personal opposition to CCW, Attorney General Nixon has sent in a very sharp team to fight this one. Clearly, having a rogue St. Louis judge stand in the way of an overwhelming legislative consensus (and thereby blocking a valid law) chaffs him far more than the thought of allowing Missouri citizens to carry concealed.
Plus, the NRA has their best and brightest working on this also. They have made it VERY clear this fight is far from over.
Everyone knew this would end up with the Supremes. The antis are in for the fight of their lives. And IF the Supremes side with them - watch for a lawsuit to be quickly filed to challenge the right of LEOs, probation/parole officers, and a host of others - INCLUDING JUDGES - from carrying concealed (they are, after all, "citizens" too).
I have a feeling they're going to sorely regret opening this can of worms.

[John Ross]

From my website http://www.john-ross.net/missouri_ccw.htm

11/7 UPDATE: Judge Ohmer made his temporary injunction permanent today, as we expected him to. The good news is he dismissed all plaintiffs' claims except the claim that any carry law passed by the legislature violates Article 1, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution. The GREAT news is that he let the entire $250,000 bond stand, and did not return ANY of the money to the plaintiffs! We have moved for the bond to be increased to $1 million and Judge Ohmer has not denied the motion yet! Damages are piling up against all the plaintiffs by the day. This is going to the Supreme Court, and my read is it will be sooner rather than later.

I have read Ohmer's reasoning behind his ruling. It is 23 pages long. Up until the very last it looks like he is going to rule for us. He even quotes language identical to Missouri's from North Carolina's Constitution. North Carolina is a shall-issue carry state. Then he basically says "Based on one sentence uttered by one delegate to Missouri's Constitutional Convention, and ignoring an opposite statement made by the same person, and also ignoring a century of case law and legal rulings in this and every other state, I don't think in 1875 they wanted the legislature to allow anyone in Missouri to carry concealed weapons, ever, under any circumstances." Go to http://www.john-ross.net/SFXF6.pdf to download a PDF file of his ruling (long download).

One interpretation of all these facts is that after painting himself into a corner with his "even a ten-year-old" statement, Ohmer is intentionally kicking this hot potato up to the Supreme Court. He let the injunction stand because to dismiss it could create chaos when sheriffs started issuing endorsements before the Supreme Court made its ruling. He knows that the only fair thing to do is to acknowledge that since his reasoning may be wrong and a century of law and legal decisions in Missouri's (and all other states') courts may be right, the plaintiffs' bond must stand, and they must continue to be at risk for all the financial damage they may have caused. For acknowledging this, Judge Ohmer must be genuinely commended.

Realize that the entire country's eyes are watching this one. If the MO Supreme Court upholds Ohmer's reasoning, EVERY law passed by our legislature since day one in any area that our Constitution does not specifically give the legislature the authority to regulate may be challenged on Constitutional grounds. That's almost everything. Guns are just the tip of the iceberg on this one. If you're involved in this civil rights battle, it will be a story to tell your grandkids.

SEND MONEY to our legal defense fund! Supreme Court fights aren't cheap!

By mail, LTC Legal Defense Fund
2000 E. Broadway, STE 307
Columbia, MO 65201

JR

[CasualShooter]

John,
Thanks for the update and the link to the PDF file for the actual document. With broad band (high speed) internet access via cable modem, the download took only a few seconds.

Now to read this puppy...

Hmmmmmmm!........