[Anotherpundit]

No, this is a big victory. for us.

We agree with the district court that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to privately keep and bear their own firearms that are suitable as individual, personal weapons and are not of the general kind or type excluded by Miller, regardless of whether the particular individual is then actually a member of a militia.(66) However, for the reasons stated, we also conclude that the predicate order in question here is sufficient, albeit likely minimally so, to support the deprivation, while it remains in effect, of the defendant's Second Amendment rights. Accordingly, we reverse the district court's dismissal of the indictment on Second Amendment grounds.

So, it's a major victory for us, in that it affirms, permanently, clearly, and concisely, an individual right. It's a minor loss in that it says Mr. Emerson could still be (temporarily) denied that right because he'd threatened his wife, despite not having actually done anything physically against her.

[Triple]

I cannot believe that the interstate commerce aspect, which gives the feds jurisdiction, continues unscathed.

Under this provision, what is excluded from federal regulation?