SAF APPEALS JUDGE’S DISMISSAL OF MOORE V. MADIGAN CARRY CASE
For Immediate Release: 2/6/2012
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation immediately filed an appeal following dismissal of its challenge to Illinois statutes that prohibit the carrying of loaded firearms outside the home for personal protection in the case of Moore v. Madigan.
The case is named for individual plaintiff Michael Moore, and defendant Lisa Madigan in her capacity as Illinois Attorney General. Joining Moore and SAF in the case are Illinois Carry, and three other private citizens, Charles Hooks, Peggy Fechter and Jon Maier.
The complaint was dismissed by Federal District Judge Sue E. Meyerscough, an Obama administration appointee who formerly served on the Illinois State Appellate Court.
In her ruling, Judge Meyerscough stated, “This Court finds that the Illinois ‘Unlawful Use of Weapons’ and ‘Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon’ statutes do not violate Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights. The United States Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit have recognized only a Second Amendment core individual right to bear arms inside the home. Further, even if this Court recognized a Second Amendment right to bear arms outside of the home and an interference with that right, the statutes nonetheless survive constitutional scrutiny.”
In response, SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb suggested the judge’s ruling defies common sense.
“We look forward to winning this important case on appeal even if it means going back to the United States Supreme Court for a third time,” Gottlieb stated. “The Second Amendment does not say, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except outside your home or that it only applies inside your house. We don’t check our constitutional rights at the front door.”
Judge Myerscough denied SAF and its co-plaintiffs a preliminary injunction against two laws in Illinois that make it a crime to carry loaded firearms outside the home for personal protection. Instead, she supported the state’s motion to dismiss the case.
As Dave Hardy noted, he found the reasoning of Judge Myersclough in this case to be "extremely sloppy."