The National Rifle Association and other pro-liberty groups have filed a 33-page civil complaint that challenges the constitutionality of the Bay State’s ban on so-called “assault weapons,” which is one of the worst-attempts we’ve seen of ignorant politicians attempting to ban something they don’t understand.

The Massachusetts chapter of the National Rifle Association has sued Governor Charlie Baker and Attorney General Maura Healey, contending the state’s ban on assault weapons is unlawful and should be declared “void and unenforceable.”

In a 33-page civil complaint filed Monday in federal court in Boston, the Gun Owners’ Action League, along with several other plaintiffs, asserts the state’s definition of assault weapons is a “non-technical, entirely fabricated, and political term of uncertain definition and scope.”

The complaint, which also names the state’s public safety secretary and the State Police as defendants, maintains that the state’s ban illegally extends to the sale or possession of certain rifles, including AR-15 and AK-47 models, that rank among the most popular in the country.

The lawsuit was in part prompted by Healey’s directive in July to toughen enforcement of the ban on so-called “copy-cat” firearms. The suit contends the directive “vastly expanded Massachusetts’ prohibition to ban an entire class of popular firearms commonly kept for lawful purposes.”

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs are seeking to have a federal judge declare both the state’s assault weapons ban, first passed in 1998, and Healey’s July action unconstitutional.

Healey is clearly guilty of overreach in attempting to claim that firearms specifically designed to comply with the letter of the law are still banned items. Her actions in July amount to a hissy fit by a woman who wants to ban things the state law doesn’t allow.

I’m more curious to see why the plaintiffs filed suit now against the ban itself, after the law had been in effect for 20-years.

I have a theory.

The 45th President of the United States is going to appoint at least one Supreme Court Justice during his term, and could possibly replace several more before this case is heard and appealed.

I think the NRA and these other pro-liberty groups are playing the long game here, folks. Expect to see more cases targeting gun control laws based on the premise that we’re going to have a pro-gun U.S. Supreme Court in the near future.