I ponder, from time to time, what it will take to constitute sufficient political pressure to get Congress and the federal Courts to back off.
Similar united action from the majority of states backed up by their National Guards and local law enforcement.
Yes, I think a confrontation between a state and the feds would clarify which has more resolve and power. See Brown v. Board of Education and civil war.
I think the feds are acting outside of the constitution that created them, and my respect for the feds is like my respect for the Mafia. They are liars, cheats, and morally bankrupt. The only honor they have it to themselves - a federal omerta. They are beyond redemption. But, and this is a big "but," they are determined, and they are eager to use the force of violence to obtain compliance.
Anyway, when Wyoming passed its parallel act, it considered and rejected using Wyoming money to defend a Wyoming citizen in a relevant federal court action (crime of possession of a intrastate item, ostensibly under federal regulation). If the state won't defend its prerogative with lawyers, what makes you think they'd defend it with guns?