Opinion here. Now, the defendant was someone who ought to be behind bars, for a long time, and fn. 4 suggests that he will be behind bars for a time on state charges. Given that, I wonder why the federales brought charges, over what was the least of his offenses. Maybe looking for publicity?

The Fifth Circuit notes that, under Bruen, the test is text, history, and tradition, and the analogs the government advanced were either inappropriate (the Militia Act of 1662, which was part of the basis of the 1688 Declaration of Rights) or simply stretching things too far.