Every legal analysis I've seen, even from pro-2A lawyers, shows that the various Firearm Freedom Acts will not stand up in court. That's why the NRA is not supporting it, and I was surprised to see Alan Gottlieb of SAF quoted as a supporter.
Montana Shooting Sports filed a suit last year as a test case and the feds have already responded in court so we'll probably know by the end of this year.
There have been a couple of state governors who have refused to sign the FFA for this reason. I'll also point out that having the state bear the cost of defending your federal lawsuit doesn't help much if the court still finds you guilty and you end up in the federal pen for twenty years!
Personally I think bills like the FFA are just a convenient way for any politician to say 'Look, I supported your Second Amendment rights' while knowing that it will never be implemented as written. I don't understand why so much effort goes into something which looks to be doomed from the outset.
Causes like Heller and McDonald v Chicago are 100x more relevant to Second Amendment rights than the Firearms Freedom Act.
It's nice to see a politician standing up to the "Guns are evil!" mantra. That said, these moves are almost meaningless as the Commerce Clause still stands according to the US Supreme Court. As such, none of these state actions will win in federal court, at least not anytime soon.