Oregon's Measure 114 was a heinous bit of law pushed through by urban centers and directly screwing over rural folks in the state. What's more, it was a terrible infringement on the Second Amendment.

The good news is that it hasn't fared particularly well in the courts. It's just that bad.

Proponents argue that the measure will save lives, all despite there not being any viable evidence that it will do any such thing. I'm sorry, but biased studies even RAND doesn't think cut the mustard help suggest otherwise.

But there's also the fact that it's unconstitutional, as the courts keep pointing out. The law hasn't really done all that great in the courts, as noted, and now it's gotten yet another setback. 

The Oregon Court of Appeals Friday said it would not override an eastern Oregon judge's ruling that puts the state's gun control measure, Measure 114, on hold — at least, not right now. 

The appeals court did agree, however, to speed up the time before it will hear arguments in the case. 

... The Oregon Court of Appeals said it looked at four factors in deciding whether to do what the state wanted, which is called "granting a stay." Granting a stay would put Measure 114 into effect immediately, and the court said they can also use other facts to decide the issue.

Here are the four factors, as follows: 

1. The likelihood that the state would win its argument 
2. Whether the action the state wanted was taken in good faith and not for the purpose of a delay
3. Whether there is any support in fact or in the law for what the state wanted 
4. The nature of the harm to the state or other parties, to other person and the public that will likely result from doing what the state wanted or not doing it. 

The appeals court says it's not clear which side will win once the case is heard on the merits, and the state could only point to "speculative harm" if the law isn't allowed to take effect. It was a bad day for Oregon gun grabbers. That makes me giggle.

However, that doesn't mean it will continue.

The measure is being challenged in both federal court (where a judge has allowed the law to take effect) and state court, where Judge Raschio has kept the law on hold. That means the state supreme court will be the ones to decide on this, and it'll be based primarily on the state's constitution. A particularly egregious decision might well make it before the U.S. Supreme Court--I'm looking at you, Hawaii--but for now, this is about the state's constitution and I don't know enough about Oregon's case law to say definitively how the court will rule.

What I can say, though, is that Measure 114 is a terrible infringement on the right to keep and bear arms, one pushed through by ballot initiative via people who really don't understand law, rights, or literally anything else.

Not that lawmakers are any better in that regard, admittedly, but it's a lot easier to lobby and educate a couple hundred legislators than millions of voters.

So I won't pretend to know how this will go. I'll predict how this should go, however, and that is "down in flames."

The only question is whether the Oregon Supreme Court will agree or not, and since this is Oregon, I have questions about whether that's likely to happen. We'll just have to wait and see.