Here's a great little article explaining Maura Healey's tyranny over MA gunwoners!   Great!   Thanks to GOAL for the link:

1/3/2020     Update on Supreme Court Case against Attorney General Maura Healey's banning of commonly used semi auto rifles like the AR-15 and rifles with similar components.  

The court case against Maura Healey's 'craven' re-interpretation of MA law banning commonly owned Semi-automatic rifles like popular AR-15 and similar is closer to finally reaching its completion. 
Maura Healey announced her 'edict' on July 20, 2016 in a press conference. 
Gun owners, FFL's , GOAL, pro 2A Associations and attorneys gathered together and filed a case at the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (April 2018) and lost.  They then filed with the Supreme Court of the United States and thankfully the court agreed to receive writs of certiorari pro and con on why the court should or should not hear the case. Sept 2019.
   This is an extremely important case as it will finally settle as fact that commonly held and used 'arms' by the people ARE protected by the Second Amendment and the ban/s on these firearms are unconstitutional. 
(I've read some of the filings;  the filings said the lower courts used different methods and sources in order to arrive at their conclusions while deliberately ignoring the landmark 2008 Supreme Court (Heller) decisions and the decision in the Caetano case on the protections of the Second Amendment.  
The case is Wormley et als (petitioner) v Maura Healey, MA Attorney General et als (respondents)
Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts (GOAL) reports:  "1/2/2020 – Our legal team has filed a response  to AG Healey’s brief, which asked the Supreme Court not to hear our pending case regarding her enforcement notice of July 2016.  Our response nicely outlines why the Supreme Court should hear the case. Click here to read the brief." ..."the case is scheduled for conference on 1/10/20. This means that we should have an answer soon to follow from the Supreme court regarding whether or not they will hear the case."
I've read the brief written by 'our' side;  highly informative ... not too hard to read.... of course I'm biased but the logic in the brief really cannot be denied unless you are determined not to see it. 
More information below from GOAL:.
 In Liberty,
PS:  In the Caetano case, Ms. Caetano used a stun gun in self defense and SHE was the one arrested because stun guns were not legal for citizens at that time in MA. The attorneys at filed suit for Ms. Caetano against MA and ultimately won!  MA was the only state in the country where stun guns were not legal for citizens.  The case was won on the right of Americans to 'bear arms'  and that stun guns are commonly used in America for defensive purposes and are considered 'arms' the use of which is protected.  Stun guns are now legal in MA)