|
If he had been in compliance with FOPA there would be a defense and therefore would be no standing to challenge the law, if that is his intent. The law, in my opinion is facially unconstitutional as it is a complete ban for any non-residents.
I hope this case is otherwise without negative coloration and that he pursues injunctive relief. On the other hand, the SCOTUS has not appeared anxious to address the scope of the 2A through the litigation of criminal cases, so the scope may need to be tackled on the civil front.
|