Consider this crucial question posed by Justice Kavanaugh to Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone:
Are you saying…. that Second Amendment rights, free exercise of religion rights, free speech rights, could be targeted by other states… and say everyone who sells an AR-15 is liable for a million dollars to any citizen?…
Would that kind of law be exempt from preenforcement review in federal court?….
So we can assume that this will be across the board equally applicable as the Firearms Policy Coalition says to –to all constitutional rights?
In response, Stone essentially admitted that Kavanaugh’s point is correct.
But before you jump to the conclusion that the Texas law is toast, read (or re-read) Which Genie Will the Supreme Court Let Out of the Bottle?.
This case really is a monstrosity, and I hope that SCOTUS basically says “This case is an unprecedented hot steaming mess, so don’t be too quick to assume that our opinion is going to be a good precedent for your pet causes.” But it’s hard to see how denying any injunction against the law wouldn’t be a precedent.
So I’m inclined to think that there will be some sort of injunction limited to the facts of the case (as much as they can).