JUDY WOODRUFF: And so what effect do you see around the country? In terms of other -- does this automatically call into question most other gun restrictions on the books?
R. TED CRUZ: I don't think it does. What the court said was draconian laws like D.C.'s, laws that are, in effect, blanket bans, are going to be unconstitutional.
The city of Chicago, for example, has ordinances that I think are put into substantial question as a result of this decision.
On the other hand, the court said there are other reasonable regulations. The example it used is the prohibition on felons possessing firearms. And the court said those are presumptively legal.
So it identified two extremes: one, laws that are really total bans on any private law-abiding citizen owning a firearm; and at the other level, a sensible, reasonable restriction.
In between, I think we'll probably see litigation, and the gray area over time will be filled in.
Given that, why would he badger Senator Feinstein like this?