‘Progressives’ with environmental objections to guns silent on amnesty impacts

The reason for the injunction was that an environmental impact study for the effects of allowing guns in national parks had not been completed as required by law ... How much more of an impact will the president’s immigration directives have on the environment than the off-chance a person defending their life may (or may not) need to fire off rounds of ammunition that may (or may not) leave traces within national park boundaries? If the law and judicial precedent for halting executive actions on environmental grounds pending an impact study exist, why not employ the same legal tactics as anti-gunners and environmentalcases do, and use them? [More]

Today's Gun Right Examiner report notes now that judicial precedent has been established, why not use tactics first pulled by the collectivists to attack freedom against them?