Posted on 02/19/2008 7:35:11 PM PST by djf
Secy of State Brad Johnson of Montana delivered a letter to the Washington Times about possible outcomes of the Heller decision.
Second Amendment an individual right
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide D.C. v. Heller, the first case in more than 60 years in which the court will confront the meaning of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Although Heller is about the constitutionality of the D.C. handgun ban, the court's decision will have an impact far beyond the District ("Promises breached," Op-Ed, Thursday).
The court must decide in Heller whether the Second Amendment secures a right for individuals to keep and bear arms or merely grants states the power to arm their militias, the National Guard. This latter view is called the "collective rights" theory.
A collective rights decision by the court would violate the contract by which Montana entered into statehood, called the Compact With the United States and archived at Article I of the Montana Constitution. When Montana and the United States entered into this bilateral contract in 1889, the U.S. approved the right to bear arms in the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing the right of "any person" to bear arms, clearly an individual right.
There was no assertion in 1889 that the Second Amendment was susceptible to a collective rights interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the Second Amendment to be consistent with the declared Montana constitutional right of "any person" to bear arms.
As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honored so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era of unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the United States and Montana, and many other states.
Numerous Montana lawmakers have concurred in a resolution raising this contract-violation issue. It's posted at progunleaders.org. The United States would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the Second Amendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract.
BRAD JOHNSON Montana secretary of state Helena, Mont. Montana, the Second Amendment and D.C. v. Heller
LMAO
Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah.
That should be big enough...
;-)
I think the feds would use force if necessary to stop a secession. They haven’t cared about law during my lifetime, that’s for sure.
Not really. The per capita income is one of the lowest in the Union. In constant competition with Mississippi for lowest, if my memory serves.
I took the train east2west Chicago to Seattle once, and it went through Montana.
It was beautiful. Just stunning. The only area I ever saw that I could say would be comparable was eastern Oregon, which is as close to paradise as a man could want.
The nearest Safeway is 100 miles away, but what the hey!!
Something to ponder...?
And the threat is legal (one could argue, is actually legally required), and it's actually beneficial for the State.
How’s the skiing up there?
I know a woman who is a teacher in the city of McCook Nebraska, and she is from Montana. Her advice to me was that her state is quite beautiful, but too costly to live in. I would like to think she is exaggerating, but not living there, I don’t know. I do have a desire to retire in Montana... visited there once... absolutely impressed with its beauty.
If the courts decide to change the meaning of the Constitution, many states besides Montana could sue for breach of contract.
Ping!
That will separate the wheat from the chaff in a hurry. Pack up your guns boys, we’re heading West.
And if it is over 2/3rds of the States, a very unsettling option becomes available - a Constitutional Convention could easily then be called.
And that’s something for the very, very last resort in my book. Mainly because I don’t trust us to do one correctly unless there’s absolutely no other option.
But is it big enough?
bigger than Kosovo
Knowing Colorado’s constitution, This would be a breech here too. But commie bill ritter would lobby against it.
JOHNSON JOINS "HELLER" CHORUS
HELENA—Secretary of State Brad Johnson joined the many other Montanans who have weighed in on the DC v. Heller case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court. A letter to the editor from Johnson appeared in today’s Washington Times, urging the court to protect an individual’s right to bear arms.
“This is an important issue for Montanans,” Johnson said. “Many of Montana’s elected officials spoke out on this issue; I am proud to be among them.”
The letter can be found at this link.
Johnson’s letter argued that Montana’s agreement with the United States to enter the union included Montana’s constitution at the time, which guaranteed the right of “any person” to bear arms. He urged the Supreme Court to uphold an individual rights interpretation of the Second Amendment, rather than a collective interpretation, as best in keeping with Montana’s Compact with the United States.
Many other elected officials around Montana have concurred in a statement of the same argument, in a bipartisan effort to defend Montanans’ individual right to keep and bear arms. The list of officials, as well as their resolution, can be found at: http://www.progunleaders.org.
Governor: Brian Schweitzer (D)
Senior Senator: Max Baucus (D)
Junior Senator: Jon Tester (D)
Montana State House of Representatives: 1 vote GOP majority
Montana State Senate: Two vote Democrat majority.
Attorney General: Mike McGrath (D)
Yep, Montana is a really nice place to live. It's New Jersey on the Rockies.
Excellent!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.