Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Alumni Magazines Always Say Nice Things

December 11, 2010 by

The Northern Illinois University online magazine NIU Today put out a “puff piece” on NIU alumnus Andrew Traver this week. They described him as a “great friend” to the Sociology Department.

Obama nominates NIU alum to head ATF

An NIU alumnus and “great friend” to the sociology department has been nominated to a key post in the administration of President Barack Obama.

Obama nominated Andrew Traver, a native of Naperville, to head the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

Traver, who currently serves as the agency’s special agent in charge at its Chicago field office, graduated summa cum laude from NIU in 1985. He majored in sociology with an emphasis in criminal justice.

Jack King, internship placement coordinator for the Department of Sociology, described Traver as a “great friend of the department” who has visited campus two or three times a semester in recent years to speak with students.

“This semester he spoke in my Introduction to Sociology class and in a criminology class. He has also spoken at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Lifelong Learning Institute,” King said.

“ATF has also provided internships for sociology majors for the past four years,” King added. “We have an intern with the agency this semester.”

Traver has spent 23 years with the ATF, starting with the Chicago branch in 1987 before taking positions in Philadelphia, New Orleans and San Francisco. He is most known for his attempts in clearing Chicago’s city streets of gang violence.

ATF has not had a permanent director since Carl Truscott’s resignation in 2006. Traver is the first ATF special agent to be presidentially nominated.

Uncategorized

Virginia Tech Broke Federal Law

December 10, 2010 by

David Codrea in his National Gun Rights Examiner column examines the Federal complaint against Virginia Tech for violating the Clery Act. The Clery Act mandates that a college or university issue a timely warning if there is an on-campus threat.

Read the whole thing. It appears that Virginia Tech’s delay in notification to its student body and staff allowed Seung-Hui Cho the ability to kill 30 more students and faculty. Of course, Virginia Tech denies it.

Uncategorized

Brilliant Move, TSA

December 10, 2010 by 4 Comments

In what can only be described as a brilliant diplomatic move, TSA agents at Jackson-Evers International Airport in Jackson, Mississippi pulled the sari-clad Indian Ambassador to the U.S. out of line for a pat-down. Her Excellency Meera Shankar was in Jackson to deliver a speech at a local university in conjunction with its international studies program.

According to a story in the Wall Street Journal, the incident happened this past weekend and the Indian Embassy plans to make a formal complaint to the State Department. The incident is a big story back in India according to reports. The Indians consider the pat-down a breech of diplomatic protocol.

Department of Homeland Security officials said the TSA agents made “right call when they patted down Ms. Shankar.”

There is no word on whether the TSA agents or the DHS officials performed the pat-down in retaliation for being switched to a call center in Mumbai regarding their past due credit card bill.

Uncategorized

Ezell et al v. Chicago Appeal Brief Filed

December 10, 2010 by

While I haven’t had a chance to read and digest it, Alan Gura has filed the appeal brief in Ezell et al v. Chicago with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. This is an appeal of Judge Virginia Kendall’s decision to deny the preliminary injunction against Chicago’s ban on gun ranges.

The brief which is 87 pages can be found here and the 139 page appendix which accompanies it is found here. I wanted to get this information out to a wider audience as soon as possible. Thanks are due to Gene Hoffman of CalGuns Foundation for putting it online.

Brian Doherty at Reason.com has written an excellent article on the Ezell case. It is a must read especially if you haven’t followed the case that closely. He lays it out exceedingly well. As he notes:

Second Amendment lawyer Alan Gura filed an appeal this week in the case of Ezell v. Chicago, challenging the city’s ban on gun ranges. It’s likely to be one of the first important appeals court decisions to define the new shape of Second Amendment jurisprudence.

Uncategorized

The Second Amendment Isn’t About Duck Hunting

December 9, 2010 by

An autograph auction house, Alexander Autographs, is auctioning a note sent by Barack Obama on White House stationary saying he supports the Second Amendment. The note was in response to a letter sent to him by a gentleman who noted how much money is raised for wildlife conservation by the sale of firearms and ammunition. The letter is included with this autographed note. You can read the full letter on the Alexander Autographs auction page above.

More on the auction and on Obama’s stance on gun rights is in a story from U.S. News and World Report’s Washington Whispers column entitled Obama Backs Gun Rights.

Uncategorized

WIFLE Endorses Andrew Traver

December 9, 2010 by

Women in Federal Law Enforcement or WIFLE have issued a press release urging the Senate to confirm Andrew Traver to head ATF and Michele Leonhart to head DEA:

Women in Federal Law Enforcement (WIFLE) support Top Justice Department Nominations

By Margaret Moore, President, WIFLE

Dated: Dec 08, 2010

Michele Leonhart, the nominee for the Drug Enforcement Administrator, and Andrew Traver, the nominee for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director, has the support of the Women in Federal Law Enforcement, (WIFLE).

WIFLE believes that these nominees are the best choices to lead their respective agencies. We urge the Judiciary Committee to support these important nominations.

“It is critical that ATF and DEA have confirmed leaders. With drug violence and gang violence permeating our country, Congress is leaving two essential Justice Department agencies’ top positions vacant. This is not
an effective way to combat violence in a comprehensive manner. WIFLE urges congress to act now and do justice to the men and women of ATF and DEA who risk their lives every day to protect our nation from the scourge of violence and drug abuse. It is not fair to the citizens of our country–or to the agents and support personnel who are on the front lines–to leave these important agencies without permanent leadership. We implore the Judiciary Committee to provide ATF and DEA with much needed stability and
confirm Andrew Traver and Michele Leonhart.”

I have never heard of WIFLE whose name reminds me of a game I used to play as a kid. Their prime website as found in Google, http://www.wifle.org/, has a placeholder from their website provider.

From policeone.com about WIFLE:

The two WIFLE organizations work in tandem to promote and support women in federal law enforcement. The WIFLE Foundation, Inc., incorporated in 2006, is the educational entity providing for the Annual Leadership Training Conference, the Scholarship Program, research, and other programs. The WIFLE Scholarship Fund provides scholarship monies to students pursing educational opportunities in law enforcement related fields. Women in Federal Law Enforcement, Inc. was incorporated ten years ago in June 1999 to serve as a professional organization for women and men in federal law enforcement. It is an outgrowth of the former Interagency Committee on Women in Federal Law Enforcement created in 1978 and cosponsored by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Treasury. Together, these three tax-exempt organizations form WIFLE’s unique identity supporting federal law enforcement.

The WIFLE endorsement seems aimed as much at getting that organization some new coverage as it is on pushing the nomination of Andrew Traver.

Uncategorized

Updates on Second Amendment Arms et al v. Chicago et al

December 9, 2010 by

Second Amendment Arms v. Chicago was the second case filed challenging the new Chicago Gun Law. This case since it wasn’t brought by either the National Rifle Association or the Second Amendment Foundation has generated a lot less scrutiny and news. The plaintiffs’ attorney, Walter Maksym, is best known for representing Drew Peterson and not for his expertise in Second Amendment law.

An amended complaint was filed at the beginning of October which added the Illinois gun rights group, ICarry, as an organizational plaintiff and Shaun Kranish as an individual plaintiff.

On November 24th, the City of Chicago filed a motion to dismiss this case on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) grounds. The city argues that the complaint and the plaintiff’s First Claim for Relief fail to state a claim. They also challenge the standing of Second Amendment Arms and ICarry as they argue that “the Second Amendment only confers an individual right, and they are not individuals.” Chicago also is challenging the standing of the individual plaintiffs for failure to identify an injury under the Ordinance. Finally, it asks that among other things that Mayor Daley, Police Superintendent Wies, Miguel Del Valle, and Corporation Counsel Mara Georges be dismissed as defendants.

A joint status report was filed on Monday and a status hearing was held on Wednesday. The status report indicated the principal legal issues as a violation of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution as well as other violations of the Illinois Constitution. The factual issues are up in the air due to the lack of discovery and because Chicago has moved to dismiss the case. Finally no settlement discussions have been held.

In the status hearing yesterday, Judge Robert Dow advised that he is taking Chicago’s Motion to Dismiss under advisement, that the plaintiffs have until January 21, 2011 to file a 20-page response to dismissal motion, and that Chicago has until February 16th to file their reply to the response. He also said that he will rule on the Motion to Dismiss by mail.

Of the three challenges in Federal court to the new Chicago Gun Law, this is probably the weakest legally and, in my opinion, should never have been filed. As Alan Gura has noted many times, there is a proper strategic way to go about Second Amendment litigation and then there are all the other ways. Unfortunately, both ways can set precedent and we are stuck with it. If Second Amendment jurisprudence was settled law, anyone could do it. It isn’t settled law and not everyone should be doing it.

So it is with this case. The complaint was not tightly written, errors were made in procedure by the plaintiffs’ attorney, and even the service of the original complaint took months. Robert Zieman will never get compensated for the firearms taken under the old law and I sincerely doubt that this case will ever be allowed to granted class action status. The best thing that could happen – which probably won’t – is that this case be voluntarily withdrawn. I hate to sound so negative but I don’t think this is the case to pin any hope on.

Uncategorized

Updates on Benson et al v. City of Chicago et al

December 9, 2010 by

The attorneys for both Benson and the City of Chicago have agreed to continue discovery through March 31, 2011. Discovery had been scheduled to end on January 7, 2011. They filed an Agreed Motion to Extend Fact Discovery this past Friday. There has been no ruling by Judge Ronald Guzman yet on whether to accept this Agreed Motion.

This passage seems to indicate some legal wrangling over the scope of the discovery:

Notwithstanding the parties’ respective timely responses to discovery and production of documents, the parties have, in response to various discovery requests, disputed the permissible scope of discovery in this case. For example, the parties have disagreed about the permissible scope of document requests and whether certain depositions are appropriate. Nonetheless, for over a month, the parties have engaged, and continue to engage, in good-faith negotiations to come to agreement on these issues—or at least to narrow the ultimate scope of disagreement. Despite these efforts, complete agreement does not appear likely and thus the parties anticipate that some of these issues will soon be brought before the Court in the form of motions to compel or to quash. But the parties continue to work to refine and narrow the ultimate issues that will be litigated.

The more important news contained within this motion is that the plaintiffs plan to file a Second Amended Complaint which will probably add another plaintiff, add another count to the complaint, and some more factual detail.

The bigger news in this case is that Judge Guzman has denied the motions by the City of Chicago to reassign both Ezell et al v. Chicago and Second Amendment Arms et al v. Chicago to his court. Ezell is the case brought by the Second Amendment Foundation challenging the ban on gun ranges and Second Amendment Arms is an independent case brought by attorney Walter Maksym.

Judge Guzman gave the following reason for denying the motions:

Plaintiffs seek to have Ezell v. City of Chicago, 10 C 5135, pending before Judge Kendall, and Second Amendment Arms v. City of Chicago, 10 C 4257, pending before Judge Dow, reassigned to this Court. The case before Judge Kendall is in a different procedural posture than this one. She has already held a hearing on and denied plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, a ruling that is currently pending before the Seventh Circuit. The case before Judge Dow is broader in scope than this one. The plaintiffs in that case seek restitution, damages and a writ of mandamus, claims not asserted here. Given the substantial differences between those cases and this one, reassignment is not appropriate. See Local Rule 40.4.

I should point out that it was actually the defendants and not the plaintiffs who sought to have the cases transferred to Judge Guzman. The plaintiffs in all the cases had vigorously sought not to have the cases transferred but probably none so strongly as Alan Gura in the Ezell case.

This last part is very good news.