Except that the 3 judges on the 4th Circuit who concluded “strict scrutiny obviously applies to enumerated rights” had their ruling vacated and is now subject to “en banc” review where the entire 4th Circuit (11 judges?) have their say and may decide (or be persuaded) otherwise.
Same crap they pulled with the Peruta case in the 9th cicuit, which is 3 months shy of a year after oral arguments presented in June 2015.
These en banc ruling are much more troublesome because the losing party in Kolbe or Peruta has an evenly divided Supreme Court now after Justice Scalia’s death. If the rulings go 4-4 in the SC the 4th and 9th en banc decisions would stand
Yes, that is what I thought. The article is a bit out of date.