Bevis v. Naperville (7th Cir.) oral arguments, analysis
B.L.U.F. An examination of how judges act and how to read the tea-leaves. Also, the sorts of ridiculous things that are said and don’t get rebutted.
The head judge is Frank Easterbrook. He has a history of dumping on the Second Amendment at every chance he can. He is the judge who got means-end into the 7th circuit court.
All quotes are from the machine created transcript, with edits by me. I will only be adding the speaker to the quotes.
Here we see that she is off to a great start, banning modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines is exactly like fire codes from the founding era.
We know from Bruen that courts must begin by assessing whether the regulated instrument is protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment
— Hunger. Nope, it is if the conduct is protected by the plain text. She is twisting words here.
The instruments must be arms. They must be bearable, and they must be in common use for self-defense. The instruments at issue here do not satisfy that standard for at least two reasons. First, large capacity magazines are not arms. They are accessories that are not necessary to the operation of any firearm.
— Hunger.
We see the standard twisting from “in common use for lawful purposes” into “in common use for self-defense”, no surprise there.
Of course, the Supreme Court has issued an opinion saying that ammunition and magazines are indeed arms.
Read More
