Why not?
That's pretty much what we have going on, where the Left Coast and Minority-Dominated entitlements' crowds are have installed Activist Judges who make law by tortured readings of the Constitution in order to enact the Liberal agenda.
The Law of the land is no longer based on the Framers' intent, nor the plain language of the Constitution; it's now based on the twisted interpretations that brought us to this point of taxation, socialism, and every sort of burden on individual freedom that was expressly forbidden in the Constitution to begin with.
The attacks by the ACLU, Atheists, sex deviates, minorities, and every other special interest have eroded whatever freedoms we once had, with no relief in sight.
When illegal criminals can be afforded sanctuary in locations of Liberal control, clearly in violation of Federal Law, why would the citizenry's right to be armed to defend themselves necessarily be expected to be protected?
This case will determine if yet another freedom is taken away (the right to bear arms).
You can bet that if the Constitution is upheld, the Liberals will be screaming about "the children" and "we must pass legislation to stop the killing", etc., and the push will continue to disarm those who abide by the law, and to remove the guns from the opposition to the socialists takeover of the entire economy.
You cannot have two wildly divergent sets of case law, because to have such means that people are denied equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.
There are two courts (the Fifth Circuit and the DC Court of Appeals) in this land that agree with the Founders’ plain language and intent of the Second Amendment. The Fifth Circuit Court’s opinion was used as precedent and has been cited in other cases.
There is one Circuit Court who has acted exactly as you have described the Left Coast acting: the Ninth Circuit Court is indeed dominated by activist judges leaping to their own preferred conclusions.
If you have paid any attention to the track record of the SCOTUS WRT to the Ninth Circuit Court, you’d know that the SCOTUS has a clear, long and hilarious track record of slapping down decision after decision that has come out of the Ninth Circuit Court, not to mention the plaintive wailing and entreaties to stop executions that used to wake Chief Justice Rhenquist at about 0245 eastern time that really used to piss off Rhenquist (and the other justices).
Prior to this case, the SCOTUS lacked a clear, well-defined and well-argued case on their docket with which to slap down the Ninth’s prior decision on RKBA. This case coming out of DC is exceptionally well formed for RKBA advocates, following all of the requirements that Don Kates had explained to me were necessary back in the 90’s, when the assault weapons “ban” was put into place, etc.
This case coming out of DC has been exceptionally well formed and argued for RKBA advocates. The DC Court of Appeals slapped down the DC gun ban. The DC government responded with a counter-argument in appeal that literally undercuts their own position. I don’t fear this case going in front of the SCOTUS the way I would have feared a great many other cases being appealed to the SCOTUS. Unlike most other RKBA cases in court, there are no criminals involved here — only law-abiding citizens petitioning for their rights. Unlike most other RKBA cases, there is a clear prohibition on all guns in DC (ie, no handguns at all, rifles/shotguns must be disassembled, rendering them non-functional and therefore an arm in only an academic sense).
It is possibly the best formed RKBA case for RKBA advocates to come before the SCOTUS in the last 50 years.
I would further NB that the NRA isn’t involved in this, so the chances of successful outcome are greatly increased.