• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

MOC won, CADL lost. Victory!!!

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
From the conclusion:

"We reverse the trial court’s judgment upholding CADL’s weapon policy to the extent that
it attempts to regulate firearms contrary to the restrictions set forth in MCL 123.1102 and vacate
the trial court’s order granting permanent injunctive relief."
 

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
With a very nice broad judgment too. Love this line...

"Although a district library is not a local unit of government as defined by MCL 123.1101(a), legislative history, the pervasiveness of the Legislature’s regulation of firearms, and the need for exclusive, uniform state regulation of firearm possession as compared to a patchwork of inconsistent local regulations indicate that the Legislature has completely occupied the field that CADL seeks to enter."

School districts?? Hmmmm
 

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
750
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
...and this gem mentioned in the decision:

"As can be gleaned from these numerous statutes included in the Legislature's statutory scheme regulating firearms, the statutory scheme includes "a broad, detailed, and multifaceted attack" on the possession of firearms (citing Llewellyn, 401 Mich at 326)."

I find such a candid assessment of the Michigan legislature's (lack of) respect for the Article 18, Sec. 7 of the Michigan Constitution (Right to Bear Arms) both troubling and very enlightening.
 
Last edited:

sasha601

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
338
Location
Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
In her dissenting opinion Judge Gleicher argues that CADL is not a local unit of government, so preemption statute does not apply to CADL. She writes:

"This statute applies to “a local unit of government.” The Legislature specifically defined that term to mean “a city, village, township, or county.” MCL 123.1101(a). Conspicuously absent from this definition is a district library or an authority. Thus, a district library is not subject to MCL 123.1102, which prohibits local units of government from enacting or enforcing any regulations pertaining to the possession of firearms."

Responding to this statement, judges who rulled in favor of MOC found that CADL is indeed a local unit of government. In their opinion they wrote:

"As mentioned above, the Preamble to 1990 PA 319 states that the act was designed to prohibit local units of government from imposing restrictions in the area of firearms regulation. Although not included in the definition of “local unit of government” set forth in MCL 123.1101(a), a district library is nevertheless a local unit of government. Excluding a district library from the field of regulation—simply because it is established by two local units of government instead of one—defies the purpose of the statute and it would undoubtedly lead to patchwork regulation. Every district library in the state of Michigan could enact its own unique rules and regulations regarding firearms possession, leaving to the public the obligation of determining where they can bring—or avoid—guns. Thus, while the express language of the statute fails to include a district library among its definition of local units of government, the legislative history supports a finding that the purpose of the statute would only be served by leaving it to the state to regulate firearm possession in all buildings established by local units of government, including district libraries."

In fact the language in the above quote is so strong as relates to State completely occupying the field of regulating firearms, that I believe that firearm ordinances established by Schools and Universities are now also null and void. This is my personal opinion.
 

Tucker6900

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,279
Location
Iowa, USA
Fine job to all the people who made this happen!!! This is great news for my home state!! CARRY ON!!!!
 

OC4me

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
750
Location
Northwest Kent County, Michigan
". . . while the express language of the statute fails to include a district library among its definition of local units of government, the legislative history supports a finding that the purpose of the statute would only be served by leaving it to the state to regulate firearm possession in all buildings established by local units of government, including district libraries."

In fact the language in the above quote is so strong as relates to State completely occupying the field of regulating firearms, that I believe that firearm ordinances established by Schools and Universities are now also null and void. This is my personal opinion.

+1 Schools and Universities have been citing the fact that the preemption statute fails to explicitly mention schools in its definition of local units of government ;-)

Does this Appeals court decision serve as binding precedent for the entire State? (excuse my judicial ignorance). I wonder whether or not CADL will appeal. I half hope so (so they can get spanked more forcefully) and yes, I'll gladly donate to help cover further litigation if required.
 
Last edited:

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA
Best news I could have received today, I am down recovering from major surgery to solve the headaches (removed disc in neck impinged on spinal cord and fused C5-C6 vertebrae).

A heartfelt thanks to the Attorneys that did the work here. The same goes out to those who helped in whatever respect they did.

I was hopeful that the COA would find this way, although the mood that day in the court was less than hopeful.

As firearm owners, we all won.
 

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
+1 Does this Appeals court decision serve as binding precedent for the entire State? (excuse my judicial ignorance). For sure the above quote would be great if the Michigan Supreme Court would only say so as well. I wonder whether or not CADL will appeal. I half hope so (so they can get spanked more forcefully), if not for the associated cost to MOC in fighting the next level.

Yes this is binding state-wide.
 

sasha601

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
338
Location
Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
Yes this is binding state-wide.

It is up to CADL if they want to appeal to Michigan Supreme Court. In the previous landmark decision of MCRGO vs City of Ferndale, city of Ferndale decided not to appeal to MSC. I believe before going to MSC, CADL has an option of requesting 7 judge panel at the Court of Appeals which should include 3 judges that already ruled. In this case CADL would need 3 out of 4 new judges to rule in their failure to get a 4:3 decision to win. However, it is just my speculation and I am not sure if CADL is entitled to a 7 judge panel in this case.
 
Top