Liko81
Founder's Club Member
Simple question, I think. From what I know of the law, a lawsuit against the State under 42 USC 1983 can be rendered moot if the State changes the law or whatever situation is being challenged, so that the Plaintiff's original complaint no longer applies. Basically, the Plaintiffs only have standing as long as their rights are still infringed. This is why a lot of 2A cases get class-action status; the State or local jurisdiction could otherwise make the whole thing go away by giving the specific named Plaintiffs a permit to do as they're asking for, while still barring everyone else from doing the same.
With the Illinois Concealed Carry statute on Gov. Quinn's desk, and the ball in the State's court for an appeal to SCOTUS on Moore v. Madigan, the question is, can he do both? does Quinn, or Madigan, or the ISP, still have standing to appeal to SCOTUS if Quinn signs the bill into law? For that matter, does the SAF or any other Plaintiff/Petitioner still have the right to appeal if Quinn signs the bill into law, and if not, does the case still stand as presenting divided Circuit Court opinions on the matter of self-defense outside the home?
With the Illinois Concealed Carry statute on Gov. Quinn's desk, and the ball in the State's court for an appeal to SCOTUS on Moore v. Madigan, the question is, can he do both? does Quinn, or Madigan, or the ISP, still have standing to appeal to SCOTUS if Quinn signs the bill into law? For that matter, does the SAF or any other Plaintiff/Petitioner still have the right to appeal if Quinn signs the bill into law, and if not, does the case still stand as presenting divided Circuit Court opinions on the matter of self-defense outside the home?