Feds shoot down Montana's 2A law...

[BeastlyAdams]

another legal avenue closed....

http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/supremes-shoot-down-states-fight-for-gun-rights/

 

[The5thDentist]

I'll have to look later. IE doesn't like that stupid giant Bitcoin popup.

 

[Squire]

“This epic trip to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the court’s 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,” he said.

That sounds like something someone would say before declaring Independence from said centralized and tyrannical power.

 

[Boris]

not loading, so Montana is separating?

 

[fubar]

He also writes :

" In his letter, Marbut cited President John F. Kennedy’s warning: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.”

His lawsuit, he said, “is our best, and could be the last or near last, attempt at the peaceful revolution we’d all emphatically prefer to the alternative Kennedy asserted.”

 

[DarthRevan]

Huh... interesting.

 

[June4th]

Rights are not granted, rights are asserted.

 

[crazymjb]

Not surprising at all. SCOTUS ****ed over states rights in Wickard v Filburn in 1942 and re-asserted that raping in Gonzales v Raich in 2005. I just did a paper on this. The way "commerce" is interpreted it litterally can be applied to anything. In the case of Raich he grew pot plants in his own home for his own consumption (legally in CA) and SCOTUS claimed it to have enough of an effect on interstate commerce that it could be regulated (an alrernate ruling could in effect nullify much of the DEAs role in the war on drugs).

This seems to fly in the face of enumerated powers, as commerce effectivelt adds "everything else" to that list. SCOTUS has been consistent, so its time to accept that states rights dont exist. In my opinion the decisions in these cases were pure BS and increadibly detrimental in the ammount of power they give the federal government.

Mike

Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...

 

[Bonesinium]

Yes, basically, they have ruled that buy not engaging in interstate commerce, you effect interstate commerce, because otherwise you would be engaging in interstate commerce. Likewise, if you only engage in intrastate commerce, it means you could engage in interstate commerce, so that effects it also. In other words, your mere existence effects it, and therefore all actions can be regulated by the federal government by said clause. If that seems asinine, it is, but it doesn't make it untrue...

This is not only another example of it, but also an example of legislating from the bench, ignore law in favor of agendas, and you know, that little thing called tyranny. No big deal really.

 

[crazymjb]

Its quite absurd. You cant explain the enumerated powers including a laundry list of things which gets as specific as building roads and post offices... and then saying that commerce, which is one item on the list, actually means everything under the sun... its such an obviously bad interpretation of the constitution I dont understand how its been upheld by completelt different courts.

Mike

Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...

 

[ToddDubya]

He also writes :

" In his letter, Marbut cited President John F. Kennedy’s warning: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.”

His lawsuit, he said, “is our best, and could be the last or near last, attempt at the peaceful revolution we’d all emphatically prefer to the alternative Kennedy asserted.”

Very thinly veiled.

 

[David Balkus]

If this is the case the fed's wish to take..Would this not effectively nullify all state law??

 

[cekim]

Its quite absurd. You cant explain the enumerated powers including a laundry list of things which gets as specific as building roads and post offices... and then saying that commerce, which is one item on the list, actually means everything under the sun... its such an obviously bad interpretation of the constitution I dont understand how its been upheld by completelt different courts.

Mike

Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...

Pretty much...

They screwed up and should have required each enumerated power to be added explicitly before exercise. By the time they were debating such things on the floor, the revolutionaries had given way to professional politicians and it was too late.