November 28, 2014



12 Attorneys General: 10th Amendment ‘Turned On Its Head’ On Montana Firearms Freedom Act

January 11, 2014


State Sovereignty

| I firmly believe in the Tenth Amendment and I want all citizens to understand the concept that “nullification…is the rightful remedy” when the federal government reaches beyond its constitutional powers.



Opinions from Liberty Crier contributors and members are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of The Liberty Crier.

defend-gun-rightsBy Bob Unruh

Brief argues Supreme Court should use Montana gun case to fix 

Attorneys general in one-fourth of the states say the 10th Amendment essentially has been overturned by decades of incorrect court rulings, and the Supreme Court needs to repair the damage.

“By abandoning any meaningful standard for the substantiality of an intrastate activity’s effects on interstate commerce, this court has enabled the Congress to ‘draw the circle broadly enough to cover’ activity, that when viewed in isolation, would have no substantial effect on interstate commerce at all,” representatives for the 12 states have told the high court.

The states are Utah, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming.

Tom Woods Liberty Classroom

The arguments are part of a surge of requests for the Supreme Court to take under review a dispute over the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. The law states that firearms made and kept in Montana are exempt from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause, which gives the federal government authority to regulate commerce only “among” the states.

The case was brought by the Montana Shooting Sports Association and its president, Gary Marbut, after the Montana legislature adopted the law and the federal government threatened firearms dealers and potential manufacturers.

12 Attorneys General: 10th Amendment ‘Turned On Its Head’ On Montana Firearms Freedom Act [continued]

 




The Liberty Crier is delivered to tens of thousands of subscribers daily.
Get your FREE copy by subscribing below!

   
 

 

 

 

 

  • fatwillie

    not only the 10th but others as well.

  • Tim

    Again, the constitution was not written “for us” but “by us”, it was written “for them” to follow. So if you believe that some “commerce clause” applies to your private activities everyday, then by all means bow down and lick the boots of your masters.

  • Marcus Antonius

    “The American People, Pretend to be Free.
    Their Masters In Washington, Pretend to Agree.”
    Sic Semper Tyrannis !

  • Randy Dixon

    There’s already a law against the U.S. Govt’s illegal gun grab. It’s called the Bill of Rights. Shared the hell out of that excellent article. ;) #OATH not #NDAA

  • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

    The federal government is willing to send people to die in order to take away your freedom and more easily confiscate the fruits of your labor. When will we be willing to take those lives in order to secure the same?

    Honestly, it’s only a matter of time. A little revolution now and then is a good thing.

  • Sean

    This is the case being discussed:
    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/07/16/09-36008.pdf

    I read through some of this and it appears, by state law that this case should be won by the plaintiff. But, we know, based on the past performance of the Federal Courts system that not all things appear to be what they are on the surface and those in high position tend to pervert that position to reflect their political views and not the intent/purpose of the Constitution or Bill of Rights.

Previous post:

Next post:

Copyright ©2014 LibertyCrier.com