[Sasparilla]

...If these restrictions has been allowed to stand, it may have served to undermine future 2A rights on mainland USA...

This was a lone Federal Judge. This undoubtedly will be expedited to the 9th Circuit Appeals Court where it will most likely decide that Constitutional “Intermediate” scrutiny was incorrectly applied, and find a “Rational Basis,” whatever bizarre one they come up with, should be applied and uphold the harsh laws. After all, it’s the 9th Circuit.

[datricker]

This undoubtedly will be expedited to the 9th Circuit Appeals Court where it will most likely decide that Constitutional “Intermediate” scrutiny was incorrectly applied, and find a “Rational Basis,” whatever bizarre one they come up with, should be applied and uphold the harsh laws. After all, it’s the 9th Circuit.

Time to impeach the entire 9th circuit - I believe congress can do this.

I hope Trump starts mentioning he'll ask for this

[Talisker]

This was a lone Federal Judge. This undoubtedly will be expedited to the 9th Circuit Appeals Court where it will most likely decide that Constitutional “Intermediate” scrutiny was incorrectly applied, and find a “Rational Basis,” whatever bizarre one they come up with, should be applied and uphold the harsh laws. After all, it’s the 9th Circuit.

I don't think so - her logic was stone cold sober. She merely pointed out that without either concealed or open carry the 2nd is functionally negated, so the court has to choose which one it wants to restrict. Since, historically, restrictions came with concealed carry, that meant that restrictions on open carry were - by definition - violations of the 2nd, and then ruled on those grounds. It's sweet, actually - the way the law is SUPPOSED to be argued.