The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Gun Groups File Lawsuit - Montana Firearms Freedom Act  (Read 12766 times)

Basil Fishbone

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2091
    • http://
Re: Gun Groups File Lawsuit - Montana Firearms Freedom Act
« Reply #30 on: June 16, 2011, 12:47:18 am »

Excellent editorial!  ~Basil

----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Marbut-MSSA
To: mssa@mtssa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:20 PM
Subject: WA Times supports MFFA and MSSA v. Holder


Editorial of the Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/15/states-challenge-feds-on-guns/

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

Logged

Basil Fishbone

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2091
    • http://
Re: Gun Groups File Lawsuit - Montana Firearms Freedom Act
« Reply #31 on: June 16, 2011, 11:44:26 am »


----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Marbut-MSSA
To: mssa@mtssa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 10:13 AM
Subject: Why the WA Times editorial about MSSA v. Holder is important


Dear MSSA Friends,,

Some of you may be wondering why today's Washington Times editorial about the Montana Firearms Freedom Act and our lawsuit to validate that, MSSA v. Holder, is important.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/15/states-challenge-feds-on-guns/

The purpose for the Montana Firearms Freedom Act is to use it and firearms as the vehicle to roll back a half-century-plus of bad Commerce Clause judicial precedent, power the federal government has been allowed by the courts to use improperly to regulate everything and anything it chooses.  Only the U.S. Supreme Court can effectively reverse this history of bad precedent, so we're playing for our case, MSSA v. Holder, to be heard and decided positively by the USSC.

However, the USSC only accepts (grants certiorari for) 5% of the cases appealed to it.  There are two features of a case that cause the USSC to be more inclined to accept a case on appeal:  1) that it is about a core constitutional issue (which our case certainly is), and 2) that there are differences between or among the various circuit courts of appeal concerning how they've ruled on the same issue.

This case is certainly about a core constitutional issue.  However, there have not yet been any lawsuits parallel to ours in other federal circuits.  Replacing that impetus in part are the many other states that have enacted or introduced Firearms Freedom Acts.  Still, this case needs to catch the attention of three or more justices on the USSC to cause them to vote to accept the case.

For building awareness among USSC justices that this case is percolating towards them and for sparking their interest, this Washington-local editorial is invaluable, as will be a front page story about the case due to soon appear in the Wall Street Journal.  You can just bet that the USSC justices and their law clerks read the Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal.  Having such seeds planted before the case is appealed to the USSC may well make the difference, causing MSSA v. Holder to be one of the few cases the USSC chooses to accept and decide.

Best wishes,

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

Logged

Junker

  • Guest
Re: Gun Groups File Lawsuit - Montana Firearms Freedom Act
« Reply #32 on: June 16, 2011, 04:30:47 pm »

"The purpose for the Montana Firearms Freedom Act is to use it and firearms as the
vehicle to roll back a half-century-plus of bad Commerce Clause judicial precedent,
power the federal government has been allowed by the courts to use improperly to
regulate everything and anything it chooses."

Pro-gun actions tend to lose.  Anti commerce-clause-control actions tend to lose.
So, using a loser cause to help with another loser clause doesn't make much
sense, to me.

But, go, go, go for it.


On the side:  Anyone reading in on this might see Veiera (the gold guy).  He's a
constitutional law guy and opines the USSC has rational reason why they've sunk
the constitution.  If it seems to make sense to constitution arguers, it might help in
explaining why constitutional argument goes awry in USSC issues.
Logged

AerialDemonMutt

  • Big Dog
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1969
  • Welcome to Wyoming, Conceder everyone armed
Re: Gun Groups File Lawsuit - Montana Firearms Freedom Act
« Reply #33 on: June 05, 2015, 12:11:22 pm »

anything new on this?
Logged
If we want our grandchildren to be able to give thanks for being Americans, we'll need to.....start steering a course away from government control of our lives-and start moving back toward greater personal responsibility.¬ ¬  Ed Feulner

I think, therefore I am not a progressive liberal socialist marxist democrat

That's WY

Bill St. Clair

  • Techie
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6561
    • End the War on Freedom
Re: Gun Groups File Lawsuit - Montana Firearms Freedom Act
« Reply #34 on: June 05, 2015, 12:56:19 pm »

I searched for "MSSA v Holder" at mtssa.org, and found "It's over -- MSSA v. Holder": http://www.mtssa.org/?p=76

The Supreme Court refused, in August of 2014, to review the Ninth Circuit Court's opinion on the Montana Firearms Freedom Act.

Quote
Finally, this epic trip to the US Supreme Court, and the Courtís rejection of MSSA v. Holder, have finally persuaded me that it is fruitless to expect any part of the federal government to control the lust for centralized and tyrannical power that our federal government displays.  Further, and perhaps more important, it proves that it is improper to rely on the federal government, or any branch thereof, to be the judge of what powers the states have delegated to the federal government in the Constitution.  As the creator of the Constitution and the federal government, only the states may properly or practically do that.

Thatís why I have proposed the concept of the Constitutional Settlements Commission (CSC), a way for the states to operate in unison to ďjust say noĒ to the federal government and its countless minions.  For a more thorough discussion of the CSC concept, see:
http://www.marbut.com/csc
Logged
"The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war." -- Bill St. Clair

"Separation of Earth and state!" -- Bill St. Clair
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up