[lentulusgracchus]

And I'm not sure Emerson is the best case for a test, since its constitutionality is an ancillary variable, not the heart of the contention.

Could you elaborate that point?

I had been under the impression that Emerson had offered two defenses, a 14A due-process defense, in which he says that VAWA offers him no opportunity to dispose of his firearms in an orderly fashion before felonizing him, and the 2A defense which is what the district court went with and Fifth Circuit wound up deliberating for two years. I understand the 2A defense is straightforward, inasmuch as VAWA infringes his 2A rights though he is not a felon and so not impaired. Or did I get that wrong?

[IronJack]

The article expressed my misgivings in this statement: the jist of the Emerson dispute and its ramifications historically have been considered matters of compelling state, not federal, interest (e.g., domestic relations, divorce, child protection).

As I see it, that is the core of this case, the domestic abuse complaint. The gun rights issues is secondary to that.

Not that that means the Supreme Court won't hear the case. It's just that I'd like a clearer-cut case of Second Amendment infringement on which to stake a victory.