[FR Class of 1998]

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.

That era began in 1865. Was Montana not paying attention?

[Republicanus_Tyrannus]

This is different. It would allow, according to Texas v Lee, the consent of the States for a legal secession. We just considered it not 2 years ago for a 10 acre town stranded in Canada.

But this would be different at a fundamental level. The statehood contracts would at first, simply revert Montana to a Territory, eliminating all Federal tax revenues from the state.

Quite. Different. And quite legal, just, and persuasive.

[Lurker]

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.

Guessing you don't read so good.

L

[dljordan]

“That era began in 1865. Was Montana not paying attention?”

You’re gonna get em’ all riled up saying that. It seems that I read a book once that started with Montana seceding followed quickly by several other mountain states.

[archy]

That era began in 1865. Was Montana not paying attention?

Quite a bit has changed since then. Or haven't you been paying attention.