Montana Legislators Fire a Shot Across the Supreme Court’s bow over Second Amendment case
We may move to Montana.
Members of the Montana legislature are hinting that if the Supreme Court rules against and individual’s gun rights as protected by the Second Amendment, it would invalidate Montana’s agreement it signed with U.S. when it became a state in 1889.
An interesting wrinkle in the gun-rights controversy: Various Montana politicians have signed a resolution arguing that anything other than an individual-right interpretation of the Second Amendment (at issue in the forthcoming Supreme Court case Heller v. D.C.) would violate the compact between Montana and the U.S.
Excerpts from the resolution:
WHEREAS, when the Court determines in Heller whether or not the Second Amendment secures an individual right, the Court will establish precedent that will affect the State of Montana and the political rights of the citizens of Montana;
WHEREAS, when Montana entered into statehood in 1889, that entrance was accomplished by a contract between Montana and the several states, a contract known as The Compact With The United States (Compact), found today as Article I of the Montana Constitution;
WHEREAS, with authority from Congress acting as agent for the several states, President Benjamin Harrison approved the Montana Constitution in 1889, which secured the right of “any person” to bear arms, clearly intended as an individual right and an individual right deemed consistent then with the Second Amendment by the parties to the contract;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the undersigned members of the 60th Montana Legislature as follows:
1. That any form of “collective rights” holding by the Court in Heller will offend the Compact; and………4. Montana reserves all usual rights and remedies under historic contract law if its Compact should be violated by any “collective rights” holding in Heller.
A more detailed explanation: “Does a “collective rights” view of the Second Amendment breach Montana’s contract for statehood?“
The only difference between a compact and a contract in any reasonable usage of the terms as they apply here is that a compact is more generally an agreement between or among states.
|UPDATE: 9:10 pm EST Thursday February 21, 2008
Just saw this at the AR-15 forums
A massive, spirited discussion followed. A few of the comments:
Mxpatriot51: “Now that’s a kick ass state.”
Voodoo3dfx: “I can see this happening a lot more in the future as the BOR is being ripped to shreds.”‘
Echoing our thoughts, CM Johnson: “I’m SURE that Sarah Brady, Diane Feinstein, and a fwe other anti-gunners would find this to be rather frighening.
discoJon1975: “I’d become a citizen of Montanastan even if it meant losing my military pension in 9 years!”
UPDATE #2: This is from last week’s AP:
It’s about time that political figures–any political figures–stood up against the ever-encroaching power of the federal government.
Montana’s legislators are to be applauded.
As Frank Zappa once sang, “Moving to Montana soon…“