The National Review is having vapors about the Fourth Circus' decision in Kolbe vs. Hogan, the lawsuit over Maryland's assault weapons ban. Somehow, this strikes me as a bit unusual for that particular publication.
I have not read the entire 116 page decision yet. That much legalese needs a fresh eye and I don't have that right now. The best I can see from reading other's takes is that the 10-4 majority is attempting to take advantage of a hole in the Heller decision. However, there seems to be a dearth of actual written opinion on the decision, which is a little odd.
Even though I'm a little pushed for time, I'll try to wade through this thing and see what I can make of it. If you know of someone with anything useful to say on the subject, leave me a comment, please.