Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

A place to share your views and make your case on any issues fit to discuss.

Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat

Post Reply
User avatar
AlphaGriz1
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:13 pm
Location: Dominating BN since 1997............

Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by AlphaGriz1 » Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:44 pm

Schweitzer is doing somethings right and deserves credit for them.

=D^ =D^ =D^ =D^ Nice job you media whore! =D^ =D^ =D^ =D^


http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/billhtml/HB0246.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://logisticsmonster.com/2009/05/03/ ... ear-about/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2009/BillHtml/HB0228.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
www.maroonblood.com
www.championshipsubdivision.com

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23951
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by SonomaCat » Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:07 pm

If that first bill holds up to judicial review, it would really be a big deal ... especially in terms of gutting the feds' power to overrule state law on matters like drugs (including legalizing drugs, euthenasia, etc.).



User avatar
GOKATS
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 9271
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: Bozeman

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by GOKATS » Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:09 pm

Other than the fact that he signed both bills I don't think the gov had anything to do with either of them.
Both bills passed the legislature handily and the gov is pro gun rights, I will give him that.


FTG!!
[quote="GrizinWashington"]The Griz suck.
[quote=" tampa_griz"] (because China isn't a part of "Asia") .....

Image
Image

Grizlaw
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3277
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:04 pm
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by Grizlaw » Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:22 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:If that first bill holds up to judicial review, it would really be a big deal ... especially in terms of gutting the feds' power to overrule state law on matters like drugs (including legalizing drugs, euthenasia, etc.).
I believe there is already contrary U.S. Supreme Court precedent in the drug arena, though. I'd have to do some research to find the details, but I vaguely recall reading a case where a state tried to enact legislation providing that Congress did not have authority under the Commerce Clause to criminalize the sale or possession of marijuana that was grown within a state and never left the state. The Court's reasoning, as I recall, was that the drug trade in general is an interstate market (and thus Congress has the authority to regulate it), and that even if a particular batch of marijuana is grown, sold, and used solely within one state, the growth, sale, and use of such marijuana still affects the interstate drug market (because presumably, it is used in place of marijuana that would otherwise be acquired from out-of-state).


I work as an attorney so that I can afford good scotch, which helps me to forget that I work as an attorney.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23951
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by SonomaCat » Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:46 pm

Grizlaw wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:If that first bill holds up to judicial review, it would really be a big deal ... especially in terms of gutting the feds' power to overrule state law on matters like drugs (including legalizing drugs, euthenasia, etc.).
I believe there is already contrary U.S. Supreme Court precedent in the drug arena, though. I'd have to do some research to find the details, but I vaguely recall reading a case where a state tried to enact legislation providing that Congress did not have authority under the Commerce Clause to criminalize the sale or possession of marijuana that was grown within a state and never left the state. The Court's reasoning, as I recall, was that the drug trade in general is an interstate market (and thus Congress has the authority to regulate it), and that even if a particular batch of marijuana is grown, sold, and used solely within one state, the growth, sale, and use of such marijuana still affects the interstate drug market (because presumably, it is used in place of marijuana that would otherwise be acquired from out-of-state).
Yeah, that's right ... but it seems unlikely that it would come to pass that they would find one way for drugs and another way for guns (at least, it would be a strange result). So I was thinking that if this particular law held up to judicial review (all the way to the SCOTUS), that it would essentially overturn that previous (bizarre) holding.



User avatar
AlphaGriz1
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:13 pm
Location: Dominating BN since 1997............

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by AlphaGriz1 » Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:28 pm

Judge Napalitano said in that one video clip that this gun law will all hinge on a potato"e" farmers case from back in the 30's? And he expects to have it overturned 5-4 or even 6-3.


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
www.maroonblood.com
www.championshipsubdivision.com

Grizlaw
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3277
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:04 pm
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by Grizlaw » Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:24 am

Bay Area Cat wrote: Yeah, that's right ... but it seems unlikely that it would come to pass that they would find one way for drugs and another way for guns (at least, it would be a strange result). So I was thinking that if this particular law held up to judicial review (all the way to the SCOTUS), that it would essentially overturn that previous (bizarre) holding.
I agree with this, but I guess my thinking is that the existence of the prior case may make it less likely that this statute would pass muster. The marijuana case from California was just decided four years ago; I doubt the Court would reverse course this soon afterward.

As for Judge Napolitano's comments -- I agree with his overall assessment (it was during the New Deal that the Supreme Court first started taking such an expansive view of the Commerce Clause, so those cases are the root of the subsequent precedent). I'm not sure I agree with his prediction as to how the current justices would vote, however. The medicinal marijuana case from California was decided in 2005, and I'd say that's the best indicator of where the current justices stand on the issue. In that case, Stevens wrote the majority opinion, and Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kennedy all joined. Scalia concurred with the judgment, but wrote a separate opinion. The dissenting justices were O'Connor, Rehnquist and Thomas.

Based on the California case (and their prior records), I think we can safely conclude that Thomas would vote to uphold the Montana law, and that Ginsburg, Breyer, Kennedy, and Stevens would all oppose it. Scalia might join Thomas, but if he did, he would be breaking from his position in the California case. (I don't have time right now to read his concurring opinion in that case; presumably he explained why he wrote separately from the majority, and a reading of his concurrence might enable me to better predict his vote in the gun case; however, regardless of his reasoning, a the fact that he concurred with the judgment in the CA case indicates that he is not entirely opposed to purely intra-state activities being regulated under the Commerce Clause). Roberts and Alito are wild cards; at least one of them would probably join Thomas, but anyone who truly thinks they can predict how two relatively new justices will vote is largely kidding themselves. Sotomayor (assuming she is confirmed) is also hard to gauge (her record might provide clues, but I am not familiar enough with her to know).


I work as an attorney so that I can afford good scotch, which helps me to forget that I work as an attorney.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23951
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Montana - World Leader in Gun Rights

Post by SonomaCat » Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:26 am

Grizlaw wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote: Yeah, that's right ... but it seems unlikely that it would come to pass that they would find one way for drugs and another way for guns (at least, it would be a strange result). So I was thinking that if this particular law held up to judicial review (all the way to the SCOTUS), that it would essentially overturn that previous (bizarre) holding.
I agree with this, but I guess my thinking is that the existence of the prior case may make it less likely that this statute would pass muster. The marijuana case from California was just decided four years ago; I doubt the Court would reverse course this soon afterward.
I agree. It was a big "if" in my initial post (and I probably should have stressed that for clarity sake).



Post Reply