I actually read about 75% of it.
Basically said that the State not only proved half the Plaintiff's case but they used junk facts and hearsay evidence to not only come up with the law but to make their case for it. That and the fact that the reasoning be behind the law met no Constitutional grounds at all. Not even the lowest standard of scrutiny if I read it right.
Not sure how this will apply to every state or on a federal level but, if nothing else, it is a good template to start with in some other states.
Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
How does one prove that the mags in their possession were purchased/owned prior to ban?
I doubt many people would be able to provide receipts from say 4 years ago.