elb -Point the second: GFSZA violations have been successfully prosecuted in several different parts of the country; the convictions were appealed; and none of the appeals (that I am aware of) were successful. In two cases that I know of -- in the 8th and 9th circuit courts -- the appeals were based on violation of the commerce clause (i.e. constitutionality) and both were rejected. In at least six other cases, other grounds were used -- i.e. they didn't even bother trying to argue it was unconstitutional -- and those appeals were rejected as well. The only successful appeal I am aware of was successful because the courts agreed tha the charged individual did in fact fit within one of the GFSZA exceptions, which is hardly a challenge to the law itself. Given that Congress has been pretty successful at regulating pretty much everything else under the Sun by claiming "interstate commerce," I don't see any successful challenge to the GFSZA unless/until there is a major sea change on the court about the whole commerce clause issue. And I don't see that at all. Would love to be wrong.
I have enjoyed your informed posts on this issue on several threads where this has been brought up. Your analysis is thoughtful and has increased my understanding of this issue.
I seem to remember in the original GFSZA Supreme Court case that the justices were very suspicious of the nexus with interstate commerce as it related to the law at the time, particularly Justice Scalia and also Justice Kennedy. Basically there was none... so they used that in their rejection of the act. However, Congress just inserted a line or two about the firearm having traveled in interstate commerce, which almost every one does. Of the two circuits that you cited where the current law has been upheld...the 9th is notoriously liberal. The 5th circuit which includes Texas has previously ruled more favorably on other gun rights cases including one on the bar to individuals under a "domestic restraining order" possessing firearms. I think the interstate commerce nexus might be vulnerable in the 5th circuit. I also think there is a reasonable line of attack on the "out of state" license issue in that a state's reciprocal recognition of another's license could be considered being licensed by the state.
I agree with your interpretation of the act applying only to Primary and Secondary schools and not colleges/universities.
-Scott