Just a few weeks ago, a federal judge in Illinois issued a partial injunction against the state's prohibition of lawful carry on public transportation. The state of Illinois is appealing that injunction and asking for a stay, but attorneys with Attorney General Kwame Raoul's office appear to have made a major mistake in citing a recent mass shooting on a Chicago Transit Authority train in their request to have the injunction stayed. 

The judge in the FPC-supported lawsuit challenging Illinois' public transportation carry ban is... not happy with the defendants pointing to a shooting on public transportation as a reason the court's ruling should be stayed: https://t.co/RAeQMT54dG pic.twitter.com/hyLI0XyyYc

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) September 25, 2024

U.S. District Judge Iain D. Johnston filed an order today establishing a hearing on October 2nd, and wants to learn more about who on the AG's staff included this sentence in its request to stay the injunction: Moreover, the potential safety implications of the Court’s order are highlighted by a recent mass shooting on the CTAs Blue Line, in which four people were murdered with firearms three days after the Court’s order was entered.

Johnston's injunction applied only to the named plaintiffs in the case, so for the time being the vast majority of Illinois residents are still prohibited from lawfully carrying on public transport even if they possess a valid concealed carry license. But the implication of the state's assertion is that Johnston's decision somehow allowed that mass shooting to take place, and now he's demanding some answers from the AG and his staff. 

Additionally, if the person who wrote this sentence is not one of the signatories to the motion, then that person must also telephonically attend the hearing. Counsel should be prepared to explain what reasonable inquiry was done as to the legal contentions and the evidentiary support for the factual contentions contained in this sentence. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(b)(2), (3). For example—and by no way of limitation—counsel should be prepared to articulate the reasonable inquiry that was made to determine if the suspect in the CTAs Blue Line shooting possessed a concealed carry permit, and if so, whether he brought the gun onto CTA property to protect himself. Moreover, counsel should explain the reasonable inquiry as to how the suspect was protecting himself from the sleeping homeless people when he allegedly shot them. If, after hearing the explanations as to any reasonable inquiry, counsel should be prepared to show cause why thefactual and legal assertions in this sentence do not violate Rule 11(b).

Did the accused killer in the Blue Line shooting possess a concealed carry license? No, according to local law enforcement.

Forest Park police announced the arrest of 30-year-old Rhanni Davis on Tuesday, and at a news conference, said Davis has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder. 

Police and court records show Davis has a criminal history, and over the years, has gone by several different spellings of their name.

In 2013, court records show Davis filed a petition to change their birth name from James Wesley D McDavis, III, to Rhianni J. Davis.

The ABC 7 I-Team found state regulatory records showing a person with that same name -- Rhianni Davis - as well as the same date-of-birth and residing zip-code was officially licensed by the state of Illinois as a private security guard.

On Wednesday, Forest Park Police Detective Lt. Dan Pater told the I-Team "it appears" that the licensed individual is the same person who was arrested for Monday's CTA shooting, but that investigators have yet to verify these details with the state.

Pater said Davis did not have a valid firearms permit or Firearm Owners Identification card, or a valid concealed carry license at the time of the shooting, and that the investigation remains ongoing.

According to prosecutors, Davis did possess a Firearm Control Card, but that only allowed him to possess a firearm while working as a security guard. 

The murders of four people on a CTA train is evidence that those with concealed carry licenses should be able to carry a gun for self-defense on public transportation, but the state of Illinois used the horrific crime as an argument to keep responsible citizens disarmed when riding on public transit. 

It took me all of 20 seconds to learn that Davis doesn't have a carry license, so the attorneys for the state should have been able to find that out for themselves before they used the murders he's accused of committing to essentially blame the judge for allowing the crime to occur. 

Because of their eagerness to smear the judge (and concealed carry holders), Raoul and his attorneys have opened the door to Judge Johnston sanctioning the AG for violating Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It kind of goes without saying, but they also haven't exactly helped their cause when it comes to staying the injunction either.

The sad truth is that violent crimes are routine on the "gun-free" CTA trains and buses. Just yesterday the website CWB Chicago reported on the arrests of three juveniles for a robbery committed on a Red Line train on September 14th, and we've also detailed numerous robberies, stabbings, and shootings on CTA property this year. Johnston was right to rule that the Illinois law barring lawful concealed carry on public transit is likely to violate the Second Amendment. I wish his injunction covered every person with an Illinois carry license, not just the named plaintiffs, but after the state's latest smear of law-abiding gun owners maybe Johnston will expand the scope of his recent ruling; not to punish the AG or his staff, but to ensure that concealed carry holders in the Chicagoland area can protect themselves from the violent predators they might encounter on public transportation.