The same way the USSC ruling on nude dancing made state laws against it less secure. All it takes is one lawsuit to overturn state laws. Which there were.
You've pushed this fraud before and you are just as wrong now. Here's why:
USSC broadened the definition of free speech to include nude dancing and some State/local laws were nullified. Had USSC given a narrow definition and said nude dancing is not protected speech, no laws would have been struck down.
Same with the RKBA. If USSC says an individual RKBA is not protected by the Second Amendment, then States decide. If USSC says an individual RKBA is protected by the Second Amendment, then some State/local anti-gun laws would be struck down.
And there are plenty of gun grabbers out there with beau coup funding to challenge state handgun laws, knowing in advance that they have the green light from the USSC.
They are doing it now and have been at it for decades. What evidence do you have they are being restrained in any way whatsoever?
State handgun laws would topple like dominoes.
Unsupported nonsense.
The only way State laws would fall is from a USSC decision that says the RKBA is an individual right.
A USSC decision saying that there is no individual RKBA would leave the question to the States.
Baloney! There were laws that defined and allowed nude dancing. Citizens filed suit to stop the practice, saying that nothing in the Constitution allows nude dancing. If the USSC said that nude dancing wasn't protected speech, the laws would have been struck down
If the USSC gives a narrow definition and says that political ads less than 30 days before an election are not protected speech, no laws would be struck down. Do I have that correct?
States that currently define and protect political ads less than 30 days prior to an election -- those laws can remain on the books?