oral arguments Archives -

Barnett V. Raoul – Oral Arguments And Analysis

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in the case of Barnett v. Raoul on Tuesday. The case involves the ban by the State of Illinois on certain semi-automatic firearms as well as standard capacity magazines. The US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois had issued a permanent injunction against the enforcement of this ban and the state appealed against this judgment. Barnett is the lead case and is the amalgam of four different challenges to the state’s Protect Illinois Communities Act.

What makes this case even more interesting than a usual AWB and mag ban case is that the US Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs and was given time in the oral arguments. Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, argued on behalf of the DOJ.

The full oral arguments can be found here. The three judge panel consisted of Judges Frank Easterbrook, Michael Brennan, and Amy St. Eve.

Involved in the case(s) since the beginning has been my good friend Todd Vandermyde. He and I had a long conversation about the case and the oral arguments earlier this week as he was in the courtroom. He has since put up an analysis of the case on his Freedom’s Steel YouTube channel. Most interesting was Todd’s analysis of what happens next depending on the opinion in the case. It could a win, it could be a win and the state appeals for an en banc hearing, it could be a split decision, or it could be a loss. All have ramifications for what direction things take from there.

Todd also did an interview with William Kirk of Washington Gun Law regarding the case. That interview is on YouTube and can be found here.

Carry Case Oral Arguments Today

The oral arguments in NYSRPA v Bruen will start this morning at 10am Eastern. If you can set aside 70 minutes of your morning, I think it will be well worth it. Remember this is the first major Second Amendment case that the SCOTUS has taken since McDonald v. Chicago in 2010.

I suggest having a nice relaxing place to listen as undoubtedly the attorneys for the State of New York as well as the Biden DOJ will make arguments that we peons don’t have any right to carry outside the home.

Here is what my view will be like.

If you go to www.supremecourt.gov and scroll down to the bottom of the landing page, you will see a button marked “live” that allows you to follow along in real time as the audio is livestreamed. You can also follow along at C-Span here.

Paul Clement, former US Solicitor General, will argue the case for the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. He will have 35 minutes. Opposing him will be Barbara Underwood, the Solicitor General of NY, who will have 20 minutes to defend New York’s good cause requirement. Another 15 minutes is set aside for Brian Fletcher, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, who will argue in favor of keeping New York’s requirement. A few votes here, a few votes there, and it would the US would be arguing in favor of the NYSRPA.

In the past, I would not have added this link to TTAG for post-argument analysis. However, Robert Farago is long gone and they do have an all-star cast. It will feature Joseph Greenlee of the Firearms Policy Coalition, David Kopel of the Independence Institute, Eugene Volokh of UCLA, and Cody Wisniewski of the Mountain States Legal Foundation’s Center to Keep and Bear Arms.

It is important to bear in mind that we probably won’t see a decision until just before this October Term closes in late June 2022. Also, a win won’t change things immediately in places like New Jersey, Hawaii, and the like as it will take more litigation. However, a win would provide the basis for challenging those states’ restrictive carry laws.