Illinois bans the Ruger 10/22 (among others)

[AlexanderA]

What is going on right now with Illinois?

The 7th Circuit refused an en banc rehearing on the AWB. That means the case now goes to the SC..... or not. For the time being, the ban is upheld.

 

[N555]

The 7th Circuit refused an en banc rehearing on the AWB. That means the case now goes to the SC..... or not. For the time being, the ban is upheld.

It looks like it's not going to the SC for now.

 

[JERRY]

The SCOTUS is not going to hear the Illinois case. Their ban stands.

 

[Mauser lover]

Do we know that for sure, or is that just your best guess? Is there a website we can visit to see what cases have been denied SC review?

 

[rabid wombat]

Do we know that for sure, or is that just your best guess? Is there a website we can visit to see what cases have been denied SC review?

It remains in place to continue working through the process

Justices won't block Illinois ban on assault-style weapons - SCOTUSblog

The Supreme Court on Thursday afternoon declined to temporarily block an Illinois law that bans the purchase, sale, possession, and manufacture of assault-style weapons. In a brief unsigned order, without any explanation, the justices denied a request to intervene after two lower courts rejected req

www.scotusblog.com

 

[JTHunter]

The SCOTUS is not going to hear the Illinois case. Their ban stands.

Supposedly, the SC didn't take the case because the case has yet to be decided at the lower levels - what is called (IIRC) "interlocutory".

 

[PapaG]

Please show me where pumps are listed. Semi-autos, street sweepers, strykers, but no pumps. I am serious. Did is miss some obscure statement. Heck, half of my high school team is shooting assault weapons if that is true.

Check the flow chart. Shotguns: is it SPECIFICALLY LISTED? No. Can it accept A box magazine or does it have a revolving cylinder? No. Is it a semiautomatic? No.
NOT an assault weapon. Period.

 

[natman]

Supposedly, the SC didn't take the case because the case has yet to be decided at the lower levels - what is called (IIRC) "interlocutory".

It's extremely rare for SCOTUS to accept a case on an interlocutory basis. They greatly prefer to take on cases that are decided and completed at the lower levels. Despite what you'll read in some media, it's NOT a comment on the merits of the case.

 

[GEM]

They leap at other political cases but some important gun cases - slow walk. There's no reason to stall except for some political dominance BS. If they have the ability - and did set the Bruen standard - get it over with.