Moore v. Madigan: SAF Sues Illinois Over Ban On Carrying For Self-Defense

The lead plaintiff in the Second Amendment Foundation’s latest suit is Michael Moore. Of course it is not the oafish Hollywood director who is the plaintiff. Rather this Michael Moore is the Superintendent of the Champaign County (IL) Jail. Prior to this, Mr. Moore worked for 30 years as a sworn corrections officer and a deputy sheriff in Cook County. Because Mr. Moore switched from a sworn position to a civilian position, he is no longer allowed to carry a firearm for self-defense in public.

The Second Amendment Foundation filed their suit yesterday in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois. By happenstance, the judge assigned to this case, Judge Sue Myersclough, is the same judge hearing the Mountain States Legal Foundation’s case, Mishaga v. Monken. The lead attorney for this case is David Jensen who is also the lead attorney is the SAF’s suit against the City of New York.

I will have an analysis of the case up after I get a chance to thoroughly read it.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has filed suit in federal court in Illinois, challenging the state’s complete prohibition on the carrying of firearms in public for the purpose of self-defense.

The lawsuit alleges that Illinois statutes that completely ban the carrying of handguns for self-defense are “inconsistent with the Second Amendment.” Joining SAF are two private citizens, Michael Moore of Champaign and Charles Hooks of Percy. Named as defendants are Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and State Police Superintendent Patrick Keen. SAF is represented by attorneys David Jensen and David Sigale. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois.

“Illinois is currently the only state in the country that imposes a complete prohibition on the carrying of firearms for personal protection by its citizens,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “The state legislature recently stopped, by a thin margin, a concealed carry measure. After the 2008 Heller ruling and last year’s McDonald ruling against the City of Chicago that incorporated the Second Amendment to the states, one would think that Illinois lawmakers would act quickly to comply with court decisions and the constitution.”

“Illinois is the only state in the country that completely prohibits its citizens from carrying guns for self-defense,” Jensen added. “It is incredible that this situation has persisted even in light of the Supreme Court’s rulings in Heller and McDonald, and we look forward to vindicating the rights of the people of Illinois.”

The lawsuit insists this case is not an attempt to force Illinois into some regulatory scheme, but only to clarify that the state’s current regulatory ban on firearms carry is impermissible under the Second Amendment.

“Every other state has some kind of regulatory scenario,” Gottlieb noted. “Even in Wisconsin, where there is no concealed carry statute, the state attorney general has recognized that open carry is legal. Only Illinois makes it statutorily impossible for average private citizens to carry firearms for self-defense.

“Whether Illinois lawmakers like it or not,” he added, “the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is the law of the land. A complete prohibition simply does not pass constitutional muster. The state cannot stick it’s head in the sand and pretend this problem does not exist..”

Some Democrat Politicians Actually Do Shoot

In the annual Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus competition featuring trap, skeet, and sporting clays, Team Democrat beat Team Republican.

CSC Co-Chair and team captain Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas accepted the trophy on behalf of team Democrat, made up of members of the CSC including: Sen. Joe Manchin, CSC Vice-Chair Rep. Heath Shuler, Rep. Collin Peterson, Rep. Bennie Thompson, former CSC Co-Chair Rep. Mike Thompson, Rep. Tim Walz.

The Republican team, lead by CSC Co-Chair, Rep. Jeff Miller of Florida, included: CSC Senate Vice-Chair Sen. Jim Risch, CSC House Vice-Chair Rep. Bob Latta, former CSC Co-Chairs Rep Paul Ryan and Rep. Don Young, Rep. Paul Broun, Rep. Jeff Duncan, Rep. Renee Ellmers, Rep. Steve King, Rep. John Kline, Rep. Billy Long, Rep. Tom Marino, Rep. Steve Pearce, Rep. Austin Scott, Rep. Steve Southerland, Rep. Tim Walberg, Rep. Rob Wittman.

The story in the Outdoor Wire also reports Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) won the skeet competition, Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) won the trap competition, and Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) won the sporting clays. Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC) won the beginner competition.

It is good to see both Democrats and Republicans supporting the shooting sports. However, judging from some of the comments by the co-chairs, many of these legislators still confuse supporting duck hunting with supporting the Second Amendment. It is unfortunate that not every member of both teams is signed on a co-sponsor of HR 822 and that goes for both the Republican as well as the Democrats.

Next year I’d propose a little different shooting competition. Instead of trap, skeet, and sporting clays, why not make it a 3-gun competition? You’d still have the shotgun involved but would add both rifle and pistol to the mix. Now that would be interesting! It would also show the ATF Shotgun Study team that 3-gun competition is a sporting use.

As an alternative since so many Members of Congress announced after the shooting of Gabby Giffords that they had a concealed carry permit and planned to use it, make it an IDPA pistol competition. That would let us see how serious they are about self-protection and what level of real training they have.

Phoenix Sued For Censoring Gun Training Billboards

The Goldwater Institute filed suit yesterday against the City of Phoenix for censoring and removing billboards that promoted gun safety and training. The lead plaintiff in the case of well-known author and activist Alan Korwin.

From the webpage set up to give details on the case:

Korwin v. Cotton (Bus Shelter Ads case)

On May 11, 2011, the Goldwater Institute filed a lawsuit on behalf of Alan Korwin and TrainMeAz LLC to challenge the decision by Debbie Cotton, director of the Phoenix Public Transit Department, to remove posters at 50 bus shelters advertising the company’s website. Ms. Cotton has claimed the ads didn’t promote a commercial transaction as required by city policy. Ms. Cotton’s explanation ignores the express purpose of TrainMeAz to make a profit while providing resources to people who want training on self-defense and marksmanship. In addition, the city of Phoenix has no written standards to explain to potential advertisers what specific messages and logos are acceptable at city bus shelters. Ms. Cotton and the city of Phoenix have arbitrarily denied Mr. Korwin’s right to free speech.

How are we upholding the Constitution?

The right to free speech is a fundamental freedom protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court has granted governments leeway in regulating commercial speech and product advertising on public property. But governments must adopt consistent standards that provide potential advertisers fair notice about when their messages might be restricted, and such standards can’t favor some viewpoints over others.

The Arizona Constitution provides an independent right of free speech in Article 2, Section 6: “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.” This lawsuit upholds the sovereign authority of a state to protect more liberty and further restrict government censorship beyond what is required by the U.S. Constitution.

What happened to bring about this challenge?

In 2010, the Arizona Legislature repealed a requirement to have a state-issued permit before carrying a firearm concealed from public view. Alan Korwin saw a business opportunity to help people who want to safely exercise their right to own and carry weapons. Mr. Korwin worked with training instructors and other organizations to create TrainMeAz.com, a website devoted to providing information about weapons safety training and locations to practice shooting skills. The business raises money by selling sponsorships to other companies for expanded promotion on the website, advertising in printed maps, and other sources of revenue.

TrainMeAz launched an advertising campaign in mid-2010 to attract customers to the website that included roadside billboards [2]. Mr. Korwin also signed a contract with CBS Outdoors, a private vendor hired by the City of Phoenix to manage advertising at city-funded bus shelters. On Oct. 11, 2010, CBS Outdoors placed an advertisement for the website at 50 bus shelters.

On Oct. 20, 2010, CBS Outdoors informed Mr. Korwin that the City of Phoenix objected to the bus shelter posters. In a telephone conference call, city officials told Mr. Korwin the posters didn’t comply with a written requirement [3] that bus shelter advertising only be used for speech that “proposes a commercial transaction.” However, city officials were unable to provide Mr. Korwin with any standards that would explain what kind of messages would meet that requirement.

Meanwhile, CBS Outdoors removed the posters at the city’s direction before the expiration of TrainMeAz’s contract.

What does Goldwater Institute want from this legal challenge?

The Goldwater Institute is asking a judge to strike down the City of Phoenix Transit Advertising Standards under the free speech protections of the Arizona and U.S. constitutions. Phoenix should be required to develop constitutional standards that make clear beforehand what kind of advertising will be approved, so all businesses are treated fairly and none will be subject to potential censorship based on a city official’s subjective views. As an alternative, the TrainMeAz poster should be considered acceptable advertising under the existing standards and allowed to appear on City of Phoenix bus shelters.

Who is the client?

The Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation represents Alan Korwin, a Phoenix resident and manager of TrainMeAz, a limited liability company with a website devoted to providing customers with information about gun safety training and locations for practicing their skills.

What are the key issues?

The TrainMeAz poster clearly complies with the requirements of the city of Phoenix for bus shelter advertising.

The poster promotes a for-profit business website where legitimate commercial activity takes place every day. The poster doesn’t include any information listed as unacceptable in the Phoenix Transit Advertising Standards [3]. The poster deals with an issue, firearms ownership and use, which the city routinely approves for advertising such as upcoming weekend gun shows.

The city of Phoenix’s written standards to explain what types of advertising would be acceptable for city bus shelters are unconstitutionally vague.

The Phoenix Transit Advertising Standards [3] list several specific items that bus shelter ads cannot advocate including false or misleading information, violence, tobacco, alcohol, and obscene language. But the standards provide no explanation about what ads are acceptable except to say they must propose a commercial transaction. This provides little guidance to potential advertisers about what messages will be accepted or rejected by the city. Clear standards are required under the Arizona and U.S. constitutions to prevent arbitrary discrimination by government officials against messages they don’t like.

Whom are we suing?

Debbie Cotton, in her official capacity as director the Phoenix Public Transit Department, enforces the advertising rules at city bus shelters.

The City of Phoenix, as its official actions must comply with the Arizona and U.S. constitutions.

Can we win?

The City of Phoenix must comply with the First and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which requires the city to provide equal protection of every person’s constitutional rights. Also, the city cannot interfere with those rights without due process of law.

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has provided Phoenix significant leeway in regulating advertising for city bus shelters under federal law. But the Arizona Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled the Arizona Constitution provides protections for speech that are even broader than the First Amendment.

Case Timeline

May 11, 2011: Complaint filed in Maricopa County Superior Court

The Legal Team

• Clint Bolick is the Goldwater Institute’s litigation director. He has extensive success before trial judges and appellate courts. He has won two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. He was named as a Lawyer of the Year in 2003 by American Lawyer magazine.

• Christina Kohn worked to advance liberty as a law clerk at the Pacific Legal Foundation in California and a research intern at the Michigan-based Mackinac Center for Public Policy before joining the Goldwater Institute as an attorney in 2010. Christina earned her law degree from Michigan State University College of Law, where she served as notes editor of the law review and president of the campus Federalist Society.

• Carrie Ann Sitren strives to defend property rights, enforce fiscal responsibility, and protect school choice. A graduate of the Wake Forest University School of Law, she also has been a strong advocate for public access to information about government policies before final decisions are reached, using Arizona’s public records law to compel city governments to release key documents that they would prefer to keep hidden.

A high-resolution sample of the censored bus-stop ad can be found here.

ATF Special Agent Jay Dobyns Interviewed By Judge Napolitano

Another video interview of ATF Special Agent Jay Dobyns. He served undercover while investigating the Hells Angels. After ATF managers including the ones who ran Operation Fast and Furious out of the Phoenix Field Division failed to protect Dobyn’s family, he blew the whistle on their actions. Here he speaks out on the failure of Operation Fast and Furious.

Watch the latest video at video.foxbusiness.com

Hanging Out To Dry

Matthew Boyle of the Daily Caller had an article on Monday which described the attempts by Department of Justice officials to push the blame for Operation Fast and Furious (aka Project Gunwalker) away from DC and out to the field. When I first read the article I immediately thought that the powers to be were letting people like ATF Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix Field Division William Newell to hang out to dry.

The second thought I had about that was that it was a very risky strategy on the part of Eric Holder, Lanny Breuer, and Kenneth Melson. For it to succeed, a person like Newell has to be willing to be the fall guy. We have already seen the number two man in that office, George Gillett, become a whistleblower when he saw the way the wind was blowing. I have my doubts that there will be any sufficient inducement forthcoming that would convince Newell not to do the same as George Gillett.

The third thing that came to mind is that Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, will take a fall over this before Eric Holder. I say this because Main Justice is trying to push part of the blame on Napolitano’s protege Dennis Burke. Mr. Burke is now the U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona and his office was closely tied into Operation Fast and Furious.

Mike Vanderboegh has done an extensive analysis of the moves of the DOJ to push the blame down to the locals along with the tie-in the drug smuggling task forces. He does a much better job that I at detailing the linkages between Operation Fast and Furious and other Federal agencies. He also directs attention to the role of the “Fusion Centers” in this debacle.

Going back to the Boyle article, Cam Edwards interviews him about it for NRA News.

Quote Of The Day

With the success of the Navy SEALs in the operation against Osama bin Laden, claims to have been a member of this elite force are on the rise. In an AP article about groups that work to expose these fakers, Steve Waterman of South Thomaston, ME said:

“There were about 500 SEALs that operated in Vietnam, and I’ve met all 20,000 of them.”

Mr. Waterman is a retired Navy diver and underwater photographer who has helped expose over 100 of these wannabes. Though never a SEAL, he participates with www.stolenvalor.com  to help expose those who fraudulently claim military honors to which they aren’t entitled.

HB 2756 – Texas Open Carry Bill

Aaron Spuler of the Weapon-Blog is asking for help. If you live in Texas and want open carry, now is the time to act.

From Aaron:

We’re running out of time to get Texas HB 2756 (Open Carry) passed this legislative session. The last day to get a vote on this one is Thursday. If we miss this opportunity, we won’t have another opportunity until 2013 (the Texas legislature only meets once every two years).

He has details on his blog here on what you need to do.

SAF Sues In Virginia Challenging

The Second Amendment Foundation released this information on the suit against Eric Holder and the head of the Virginia State Police around 4:45pm EDT.

If you listened to Tom Gresham’s GunTalk interview with Alan Gottlieb on May 1st, it becomes clear that Alan was telegraphing SAF’s next move. He discussed the implications of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia’s ruling in Dearth v. Holder in which the court said that a citizen couldn’t be denied their Second Amendment rights just because they didn’t have legal residence in a state. In that case, Mr. Dearth was a U.S. citizen living abroad and was precluded from buying a firearm because he didn’t have a state of residence. Alan said he thought the Dearth decision laid the groundwork for challenging that part of the Gun Control Act of 1968 which required residency in a state.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed suit in U.S. District Court in Virginia challenging the constitutionality of federal and Virginia provisions barring handgun sales to non-residents.

SAF is joined in the lawsuit by Michelle Lane, a District of Columbia resident who cannot legally purchase handguns because there are no retail firearms dealers inside the District. The Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller ruling struck down the District’s handgun ban, confirming that individuals have a constitutional right to possess handguns.

SAF and Lane are represented by attorney Alan Gura of Gura & Possessky, PLLC, who won both the Heller ruling and last year’s Supreme Court victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago. Named as defendants are Attorney General Eric Holder and W. Steven Flaherty, superintendent of the Virginia State Police.

“This is an important issue in the era of the national instant background check,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The NICS check should allow law-abiding citizens like Miss Lane to exercise their Second Amendment rights regardless their place of residence.”

“Americans don’t check their constitutional rights at the state line,” said Gura. “And since Michelle Lane is legally entitled to possess firearms, forcing her to seek a non-existing D.C. dealer to buy a handgun is pointless when perfectly legitimate options exist minutes across the Potomac River.”

“The Supreme Court has ruled that District residents have an individual right, protected by the Constitution, to have a handgun in their home,” Gottlieb noted. “The high court has also ruled that the Second Amendment applies to the states. Existing state and federal statutes violate both the spirit and letter of recent court rulings and the Constitution, and our lawsuit seeks to remedy that situation.”

UPDATE: Here is a link to the complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The case is Lane et al v. Holder et al.