The NFA and GCA are Largely Unconstitutional

[grayfox]

Awr Hawkins has a good article on Breitbart.
Portion quoted here:
...The Washington Times suggests the Bruen ruling means gun control of all types will now face challenges and in some cases, it is already being challenged.
The Times paraphrases Justice Clarence Thomas’s emphasis on the important of rulings like Bruen, McDonald v. Chicago (2010), and District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), saying, “The test courts must apply is whether a firearms restriction would have seemed reasonable to the founding generation that crafted and ratified the Second Amendment. If not, the law must give way to the Constitution.”
At this point the Second Amendment Foundation is seeking to challenge a federal ban on handgun purchases by people 18 to 20 years old, and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) is pointing to the Bruen decision as it seeks to have New York’s “assault weapons” ban ruled unconstitutional.
FPC claims, “There is no constitutionally relevant difference between a semi-automatic handgun, shotgun, and rifle. While some exterior physical attributes may differ — wood vs. metal stocks and furniture, the number and/or location of grips, having a bare muzzle vs. having muzzle devices, different barrel lengths, etc. — they are, in all relevant respects, the same.”
Moreover, on July 1 Breitbart News pointed out that SCOTUS vacated and remanded a number of cases centered on an “assault weapons” ban in Maryland, a “high capacity” magazine ban in California, and carry restrictions in Hawaii.
A challenge to New Jersey’s “high capacity” ban was also among the cases vacated and remanded.
Bloomberg Law noted that in remanding the cases Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “While that judicial deference to legislative interest balancing is understandable—and, elsewhere, appropriate—it is not deference that the Constitution demands here.”
The cases were vacated and remanded in light of the Bruen ruling.