Got around to reading the order. It’s here if you like:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4624040-WDWA-3D-20180731.html#text/p6
The states argument is that procedure wasn’t followed, which is a technicality. The legal justification is that by removing the ITAR restriction, the federal government is allowing untraceable and undetectable firearms to proliferate in the states, enabling prohibited persons to acquire and use them.
This, the states argue restricts 10th amendment rights of states to regulate firearms.
Interesting legal argument and, I fear in the 9th circuit, the Aug 10 hearing will result in a continued injunction until trial.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4624040-WDWA-3D-20180731.html#text/p6
The states argument is that procedure wasn’t followed, which is a technicality. The legal justification is that by removing the ITAR restriction, the federal government is allowing untraceable and undetectable firearms to proliferate in the states, enabling prohibited persons to acquire and use them.
This, the states argue restricts 10th amendment rights of states to regulate firearms.
Interesting legal argument and, I fear in the 9th circuit, the Aug 10 hearing will result in a continued injunction until trial.