Ghost guns

[montec 163]

Just caught an ammoland article stating that ghost gunner has won his case.

[gunfun 3,904]

Sorta. He settled the case with a binding and public settlement.

I think he had to win it if it ever made it to trial. The expectation of DOJ/ BATFE is that no one would be willing to put themselves in legal jeopardy, so that they can always punt on standing if the court or facts aren't stacked in their favor.

The big takeaways are 1) the government admits that: a- information is not a good subject to export treaties. b- information as political speech, which this plainly was is at least protected by the 1st amendment, and maybe by the second if it relates to arms.

2) they've been trying to use a backdoor doctrine that we can be bound by treaties that 'slightly' conflict with the constitution or US statutes, if approved by the  proper treaty method. Under the reasoning that one part of the constitution authorizes the treaty process, and if that is in conflict with another, then there is room to resolve the discrepancy. ---- This has always been a shaky doctrine, since it doesn't take much sense to realize that you can say that it is unconstitutional to use any government powers to violate the constitution, i.e. congress cannot use constitutional process to pass a bill and have it signed into law to quarter troops in your house. For the same reason, everyone has known that this doctrine was unconstitutional, and has to fall if it ever challenged with anything in obvious conflict of a clear constitutional procedure or right. So they are avoiding letting it get directly in the way. They might sign onto treaties that make trade or importation or export of arms more expensive or difficult, and get away with that, but one that prohibits political speech is too clear of a conflict to survive review in court.