>
to the constitutional analysis he argued was required by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller and a more complicated and flexible test the Ninth Circuit has applied in prior Second Amendment cases.
>
How ‘bout just vs. the simple, plain English of the 2nd (’...shall NOT be infringed.’) instead?
Glad the got the right conclusion, but if they only used the CORRECT path to get there...
That would be nice, but he has to preemptively destroy every conceivable argument against that.
Don't infringe me bro.