Gun Groups to Sue over Montana-made and Retained Firearms
MISSOULA, MT – the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) and the
Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) have formed a strategic alliance to
litigate the principles of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act (MFFA),
passed by the 2009 Montana Legislature and signed into law by Montana
Governor Brian Schweitzer.
The MFFA declares that any firearms made and retained in Montana are
not subject to any federal authority, resisting Congress’s
dramatically expanded use of the interstate commerce clause to
justify Washington’s regulation of virtually all of the private
economy. The MFFA also applies to firearm accessories and ammunition.
MSSA is most well-known for advancing pro-gun and pro-hunting bills
in the Montana Legislature, and has been successful with 54 pro-gun
and pro-hunting measures in the past 25 years. SAF is a pro-gun
foundation in Bellevue, Washington, established to press the rights
of gun owners primarily in judicial fora. SAF has been a party to
numerous lawsuits to assert the rights of gun owners across the Nation.
The primary purpose of the MFFA is to set up a legal challenge to
federal power under the commerce clause. MSSA and SAF expect to
mount this legal challenge by filing a suit for a declaratory
judgment to test the principles of the MFFA in federal court on
October 1st, the day the Montana law becomes effective.
The concept of the Firearms Freedom Act has caught fire
nationwide. Tennessee has passed a clone of the MFFA. Other clones
have been introduced in the legislatures of Alaska, Texas, Florida,
South Carolina, Minnesota and Michigan. Legislators in 19 other
states have indicated that they will introduce MFFA clones soon or
when their legislatures next convene. See: http://firearmsfreedomact.com
This wave of interest across the Nation is what the federal judiciary
calls “emerging consensus” and will play an important role in
validating the principles of the MFFA.
MSSA president Gary Marbut commented, “We’re excited to get the MFFA
into court to articulate and argue the principles of freedom and
states’ rights. It’s especially encouraging that people in so many
other states are getting tickets to ride this particular freedom
train. It will be an interesting journey, and we hope successful one.”
SAF founder Alan Gottlieb added, “This is an issue that needs public
attention because it challenges federal intrusion into an area where
the federal government clearly, and literally, has no business.”
The MSSA/SAF legal team is currently working up its arguments and
litigation strategy. The team has identified several areas of
rationale’ that have never been discussed before in cases about
Congress’s commerce clause power. The general thesis is that
Washington has gone way overboard in attempting to regulate the
internal affairs of states under the strained theory that states’
internal activities are related to interstate commerce.
Although the MFFA addresses firearms, ammunition and firearm
accessories specifically, it is primarily about states’ rights and
the commerce clause power of Congress. Firearms are the object;
states’ rights and freedom are the subjects.
- 30 -
Information: Gary Marbut; 406-549-1252
http://mtssa.org
Alan Gottlieb; 425-454-7012
http://saf.org
I don’t quite get the headline of this article. Whom do the gun-groups want to sue? The pro-gun legislation is already enacted and in force in Montana and Tennessee. You don’t have to sue if you like the law the way it is. If the Feds do nothing, carry on as planned and thank God for liberty. The thing to do would be to wait for someone to try and sue Montana or Tennessee over it, then go on defense. Has that happened yet?
States should make laws against Federal Thugs from coming into the states except under certain circumstances outlined by the states; if they violate that law then they will be arrested and fined a Trillion dollars each offense and bussed back to DC in shackles. A little diesel therapy wouldn’t hurt either.
@Riley — The best defense is a good offense. Montana’s attorney general will notify the federal government (BATFE) on October 1st that manufacturers in the state are producing firearms not regulated by BATFE. This will trigger a response from the federal government, which will end up in court. Gun groups mentioned above will support the state in its suit against the feds.
It would be nice if others states were on board by Oct. 1. It would far more difficult for the feds to dismiss as right-wing craziness this Firearm Freedoms Act if more than one or two states were set to sue. I’m waiting for Arizona. They passed a boatload of pro-gun bills right before recess (all of which Gov. Brewer signed); I’m hoping they hop on this FFA while it’s ripe.