Waht was the wording of the court order?
Did it provide any recognition to "individual rights"?
I haven't seen it, so I'm shooting from the hip here. I'd be extremely surprised if the court invoked the Second Amendment. I'd say the best we could expect is that the court cited LA RKBA statute violations.
It's also possible the court didn't say the confiscation itself was illegal, just the way the order was implemented.
I don't know.
Did it provide any recognition to "individual rights"?
IIRC, stare decesis(sp?) compels this court to follow the dicta of the 5th Circuit in the Emerson decision that the RKBA is an individual right, but I'm no lawyer.