2. Federal law contains an explicit statutory exception which provides that the federal criminal offense of firearms possession is inapplicable to persons who have had their civil rights restored on the predicate state felony conviction.3. Whether a person has had his or her civil rights restored for a state conviction is determined by state and NOT federal law.
4. However, (this "however" is the first of two elusive parts of the analysis) federal law requires that for federal law to recognize the state restoration of rights, the state restoration must include the right to vote, the right to seek and hold public office, and the right to serve on a jury.
5. If the state restoration of rights includes the three aforementioned rights the federal law contains an additional federal "unless" clause which looks to state law to see if the state imposes any restriction on the right of the convicted felon to possess a weapon (e.g., some states such as North Carolina prohibit the subsequent possession of a handgun but would allow the individual to possess a rifle or shotgun).
6. If there is some added firearms restriction under state law then (and here is the second elusive part of the analysis) the federal "unless" clause is triggered to make the possession of any firearms unlawful under federal law notwithstanding the state's restoration of civil rights. Thus, if the state says that a restored-rights felon may possess a shotgun but not a pistol, the state has allowed the felon to possess the shotgun under state law BUT, because the state has created some firearm restriction for a convicted felon, this means that the federal prohibition applies with full force notwithstanding a state restoration of rights. Thus, in the shotgun-pistol example, that person could be convicted under federal law for possession of the shotgun even though it would be perfectly lawful under state law.
federal statutes trump state on this as exhibited in the clause I highlighted.
states can grant all the gun rights to felons they like (and I think they should in qualified cases ) but the feds don't do that and if they catch you they will charge you federally and you will do serious time in a high level facility it being a gun crime (no FCC camp at Eglin) and a more lenient state statute will be no excuse
i don't think the states challenging the federal jurisdiction on gun laws will prevail in courts..it will be hard for the USSC to say federal constitutional protections void municipal gun restrictions and then turn around and say state leniency gun laws trump federal law...at least to me
it would sure turn things upside down if the states win...some good and some not so good...depends on where you live
loosening federal restrictions period would be the most effective means..a tall order admittedly