I cannot discuss that which I have not analyzed. All I have read so far is the 23 page order for summary judgement, from which one can infer some of what is in the record, but certainly not all. I could quote more from it, such as:
More fundamentally, Plaintiffs argue that California is “depriving the public of more accurate rifles that are easier to control.” (See, e.g.,Plaintiffs’ Opp. at 15.) Plaintiffs miss the point. More fundamentally, Plaintiffs argue that California is “depriving the public of more accurate rifles that are easier to control.” (See, e.g.,Plaintiffs’ Opp. at 15.) Plaintiffs miss the point. As discussed throughout, that the rifles are more accurate and easier to control is precisely why California has chosen to ban them.
Here's the judge also admonishing the plaintiffs again that they "miss the point" when claiming that cosmetic features are technically meaningless:
Plaintiffs miss the point—the enumerated features increase the capabilities of semiautomatic rifles and thereby enhance their capacity for mass violence. [ ... ] The Attorney General’s expert notes that “[a]djustable stocks also contribute to the control of the rifle in that they allow the shooter to optimize the rifle to their arm length.” (See Mersereau Report ¶ 10, Ex. 3 to Chang Decl., Doc. 76-3.) “This increases the shooter’s ability to rapidly send rounds down range with increased accuracy.”
However, I strongly suggest reading it, it's just 23 pages, and reads as a paean to the efficacy of banning semi-automatic rifles. The judge uncritically accepts and quotes liberally from amicus briefs from Everytown, and gives great weight to the arguments and briefs of the defendants, while largely summarily dismissing all arguments made by the plaintiffs. Again, this is clearly a decision written by a judge pre-disposed to accept essentially any argument supporting a blanket ban on semi-automatic "assault" rifles, and likewise pre-disposed to dismiss any arguments, regardless of efficacy, against such a ban.
If you go to https://www.courtlis...xavier-becerra/ you can obtain a limited number of other documents. Importantly, you can read the 3rd amended complaint, and the defendant argument for summary judgement -- neither of which I have had time to read yet.
Sailor, thank you very much for the response. Didn't really mean to put you on the spot, but you clearly have a much greater comprehension of the legal jargon than most here, so your interpretation is very much valued. Thank you for what you have shared.