It’s not really favorable.
They managed to concentrate on Hellers discussions about a person being able to possess for home and self protection.
So now they are throwing out government-regulated “collective rights” for a very, very limited ability to have weapons.
But their conclusions are clearly at odds with any interpretation of possession in order to be part of the militia. “Militias” don’t meet in some guys basement, they meet in the open, in public.
So I don’t think this case is done yet...
I think it is a very favorable. First of all, they are right about the gun shows. There has never been a right to sell weapons on county property, and there is no stretch of the 2A which will give you that right.
They clearly overreached on what can be defined as a "sensitive area", and their degree of scrutiny seems too low, but we are in a much stronger position to attack those points now than we were before the ruling.
The Supremes have yet to speak on the "bear" part of the 2A, Heller only addresses the "keep" part. If we can get a case before the court before one of "our" judges leaves, we may see a lot of progress.
I think we have to understand, we aren't going to get everything we want in one fell swoop, but the momentum is clearly on our side. Our position got a lot stronger today.
One of the things no one seems to have addressed is that incorporation gives every citizen "standing" to bring 2A challenges to any law. The floodgates are about to open, even if only in the 9th circuit. There are a lot of people who live there, and both CA and HI have very onerous laws.