Countdown to froth-mouthed anti-gunners ranting about how speech is different from guns in 3, 2, 1 …
A ban on a class of arms is not an “incidental” regulation. It is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech. Such restrictions on core enumerated constitutional protections are not subjected to mere intermediate scrutiny review. The majority opinion here is in uncharted territory in suggesting that intermediate scrutiny can apply to an outright ban on possession of a class of weapons that have not traditionally been banned.
That’s DC circuit judge Brett Kavanaugh, writing in his dissent from the recent ruling on Heller’s lawsuit regarding several problems with DC’s post-Heller firearms registration regulations (the consensus is that he tried to shoehorn too much into the suit instead of taking a more incremental approach).
It’s not just gunbloggers that analogize restrictions on the RKBA to restrictions on speech; now it’s federal judges, too.
Let the PSH commence!
H/T: Sebastian.
Pithy Title Goes Here 