One has to believe that the lawyers at the NRA and the GOA, etc. are looking for that perfect case
the can work up to the Supreme Court. I don't think it will hold up.
There was a recent 4th Amendment case involving tracking people through cells phones (the decision says it applies to
new technologies like GPS ankle monitors for probationers also) that were granted with a Court Order and not a warrant.
I think this case would appy to these "red flag" laws that are working off of Court orders instead of warrants.
I left it at work, I'll get the citation tomorrow.
Our ankle monitor providers are freaking out, and are trying to get around the ruling by not providing us with specific GPS coordinate locations
on the defendant. I think they are pounding sand. I think this ruling can really be effective in court-ordered seizures which are basically working off of reasonable suspicion, where if adhering to the Constitution, the cops and Court should be using the probable cause and a warrant for a legal seizure.
I am optimistic about this ruling, because the guy that was at the 6 banks when they were robbed according to his cell phone records got off.
Where this ruling will help us, IMHO, is the Court ruled that there must be a warrant signed by a Judge before a seizure is made, barring exigent circumstances. Exigent circumstances render the red flag laws moot, and without a warrant (for what?) the seizure is unconstitutional.