He's 100% correct on stopping the law while litigation is pursued. He's 100% wrong on keeping law abiding citizens from purchasing regulation magazines to buying/selling currently owned firearms, thus rendering their 2A rights useless.
This Court agrees that magazines are “arms” as used in the plain text of the Second Amendment.
I thought it said he threw all that out too. No?
I’m not that bad at comprehension, but that article was written rather confusing.