By Illinois Review
As Illinois Review reported last month, State Rep. Dan Caulkins of Decatur had filed a lawsuit challenging Gov. JB Pritzker’s Assault Weapons Ban nearly identical to the three lawsuits filed by former Republican AG candidate Thomas DeVore.
With Temporary Restraining Orders granted in all four of the cases, DeVore recently moved to transfer and consolidate the cases before Effingham County Judge Joshua Morrison.
Judge Morrison was the first judge to enter a Temporary Restraining Order, on January 20th, and that decision was affirmed on appeal by the Appellate Court, 5th District.
But in a surprising turn of events, counsel for Rep. Caulkins filed a two-paragraph opposition to DeVore’s consolidation motion yesterday with the Illinois Supreme Court. Joining with Gov. JB Pritzker and Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Rep. Caulkins is opposing consolidation on the basis that his case – while nearly identical to and filed after DeVore’s initial case – is procedurally different than DeVore’s three cases.
As it turns out, counsel for Rep. Caulkins had reached an agreement with the Illinois AG’s office to file cross-motions for summary judgment on the claims, and those motions also were filed yesterday.
Rep. Caulkins has moved for summary judgment on the basis that the Assault Weapons Ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Illinois Constitution, the basis for which the Temporary Restraining Orders have been put into place.
The Assault Weapons Ban includes seemingly arbitrary exceptions to enforcement of the ban for certain groups of people, like active and retired law enforcement, active military but not retired veterans, prison guards and private security.
In other words, a mall cop is exempt from the Assault Weapons Ban and is free to purchase an AR-15, one of the banned weapons, but a retired member of SEAL Team Six is not.
But the cross-motion for summary judgment filed yesterday by Defendants Gov. JB Pritzker and AG Raoul is not on the same Equal Protection issue. Rather, defendants’ motion challenges only Rep. Caulkins’ procedural claims.
The parties now have the opportunity to respond to each other’s cross-motions.
Put another way, Rep. Caulkins appears to have laid out his entire hand on the Equal Protection argument, now giving defendants the opportunity to potentially shore up their case to stave off summary judgment.
In DeVore’s initial case, DeVore has served discovery requests on defendants seeking to establish that there was no basis in the legislative record for the exemptions that give rise to DeVore’s Equal Protection argument. According to DeVore, the AG’s Office has declined to answer the discovery requests and is seeking an extension of time to June before having to answer.
It begs the question why Rep. Caulkins would have agreed to jump the gun on summary judgment on the Equal Protection argument and would have agreed with defendants to file cross-motions yesterday on inapposite issues.
As Illinois Review previously reported, Rep. Caulkins has come under fire for naming an unincorporated association – Law-Abiding Gun Owners of Macon County – as a plaintiff, supposedly on behalf of more than 600 individuals who believed they were joining the lawsuit and made financial donations to Rep. Caulkins’ campaign account.
The cross-motion for summary judgment filed by Gov. JB Pritzker and AG Raoul does not challenge the standing of the unincorporated association.
An adverse ruling on Rep. Caulkins’ summary judgment motion could threaten DeVore’s three cases and the Temporary Restraining Orders in place for the 4713 Illinoisans and 148 federal firearms dealers, who currently are exempted from the restrictions put into place by the Assault Weapons Ban.
Please continue to follow Illinois Review and DeVore Law Offices for more updates as they become available.
