You mean we lost...
The thing that bugged me the most about this case was how as soon as the 3 judge panel of the 5th Circuit overturned the district court's ruling, Ashcroft immediately made it DOJ policy and considered it the law of the land without any of the usual vetting that goes along with a major change in departmental policy. Gun grabbing POS - how I hate that man.
I'm not sure where you got your info, or maybe I'm misconstruing your statement, but, as I remember it (with an old man's memory), the 5th Circuit remanded it back to the district court BUT mentioned that the right to bear arms WAS an individual right. The district court let stand that Emerson HAD threatened his estranged wife with the firearm, and therefore was guilty under the Lautenberg Amendment.
Again, that is how I remember it. It was the first time in a very long time that ANY court had agreed with the individual right side of the Second Amendment. However, that was not their "ruling", it was only in their "briefs"(?).
I'm not even sure what that means except that they DID NOT rule on the unconstitutionality of the Lautengerg Amendment.
Ashcroft penned an official letter saying that the official stance of the Justice Dept. was that the Second Amendment protects an INDIVIDUAL right to keep and bear arms for the first time in 50 years. Please do not hate him. He is a good, God fearing man and a true Patriot.