Feds Respond to Firearms Freedom Act Lawsuit
Motion to Dismiss “Expected”
MISSOULA – The United States has made its first response to a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Missoula to test the Montana Firearms Freedom Act (MFFA), passed by the 2009 Legislature and signed into law by Governor Schweitzer.
The MFFA declares that any firearms, ammunition or firearms accessories made and retained in Montana are not subject to federal regulation under the power given to Congress in the U.S. Constitution to regulate commerce “among the several states.” The MFFA is a states’ rights challenge on Tenth Amendment grounds, with firearms serving as the vehicle for the challenge.
This lawsuit to validate the MFFA was brought by the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). The suit names U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as defendant, and is referred to as MSSA v. Holder.
The first response to the lawsuit by the United States is a Motion to Dismiss, submitted January 19th and considered to be a standard procedural maneuver in lawsuits against the U.S government . This motion seeks to avoid the legal merits by asserting that the Plaintiffs lack standing to sue, that a justiciable controversy does not exist, and that prevailing case law is against Plaintiffs.
MSSA President Gary Marbut, also a Plaintiff in the lawsuit explained, “The first import of this response is that the legal game is now on. There was some concern that the defendants would forfeit the game with no response in an effort to prevent this important issue from being adjudicated properly. We are now beyond that hurdle.” However, the Motion to Dismiss by Washington also seeks to sidestep proper adjudication.
SAF Chairman Alan Gottlieb said, “We are disappointed but not surprised that the government would try to kill this suit on standing, rather than arguing about the merits of the case.”
The MFFA concept has gained traction across the Nation since its passage in Montana. Tennessee has enacted a clone of the MFFA, and other clones have been introduced in the state legislatures of 19 other states, including: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. . Ten or more additional states are expected to introduce yet more MFFA clones in the next few weeks. (See: http://www.FirearmsFreedomAct.com)
The U.S.’s Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support are viewable at: http://FirearmsFreedomAct.com/montana-lawsuit-updates/
MSSA and SAF have assembled a litigation team for this effort consisting of three attorneys from Montana, one from New York, one from Florida and one from Arizona. Lead attorney for the Plaintiffs is Quentin Rhoades, partner the Missoula firm of Sullivan, Tabaracci and Rhoades. Other interested parties from both in and out of Montana are preparing to weigh in on this issue of national interest and national importance as amicus curiae (friends of the court).
Marbut commented, “The FFA concept has created a firestorm of interest nationwide. Lots of people and other states are watching carefully to see how Montana fares in this challenge to overbearing federal authority and to Washington’s attempt to control every detail of commerce in the Nation, especially including activity wholly confined within an individual state. That level of micro management certainly was not the intent of our founders when they gave Congress limited power in the Constitution to regulate commerce ‘among the states’.” (See: http://FirearmsFreedomAct.com/what-is-the-commerce-clause/)
MSSA is the primary political advocate for gun owners and hunters in Montana, having gotten 54 pro-gun and pro-hunting bills through the Montana Legislature 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.
Dear Federales,
Can’t wait to boot your asses from the Sovereign States!
Do not pass go, do not collect, just get the hell out or quit being a fed tool.
Surely you see the glowing of the torches, the glistening of the pitchforks, the neat coils of hemp rope, and the steam rising from the pots of hot tar!?!
Surely even your own spouse and children will grow weary of your skullduggery although you may not practice your evil directly upon your own friends and family.
Starving The Monkeys Continually And Forevermore,
John and Dagny Galt
Atlas Shrugged, Owners Manual For The Universe!(tm)
.
I commend the great state of Montana, and all other states that pursue this agenda. However, I would like to point out some of the tactics you will face in your suits against the Federal Government.
1) About half-way into your suit, expect the jack-booted thugs of ATF, FBI, and pretty much any other bureaucrat with a Federal Identification to acquire, seize, confiscate or rule illegal your documents, your speech, your ‘intent’, even your meeting places. To remedy this, PUBLISH EVERYTHING! Make Copies of EVERYTHING! Be diligent!
2) The Federal Government, unlike a State’s Government, can rule ‘on behalf of the People of the United States of America.’ That means they can pass sweeping legislation: laws, rules, terms, you name it, ‘on behalf’ of you! And they can do it from Washington, without even visiting your state. And, they can jail you, indefinitely (See Article I, Section 9 of the US Constitution) with it. “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Case of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” We all know that the original Assault Weapons Ban was put in place “for our safety.” I didn’t get to vote on it, did you? Be careful, and have tons of money, guns and lawyers standing by.
3) Expect the media, both mainstream and otherwise, to fall in line with the ‘Official Doctrine’ of the Federal Government. In fact, expect the FG to ‘dictate’ to the media their line of reasoning, and ONLY their line of reasoning. You will need your own media. Start planning for that NOW.
4) Expect your families, your friends, your neighbors, your employers, everyone you know to be subjected to intimidation at the hands of Federal Law Enforcement. Expect many of your staunchest supporters to suddenly and seemingly without reason abandon your cause (because of this intimidation). Expect local Law Enforcement to back up Federal Law Enforcement, blindly. Expect your elected officials to browbeat you and your cause, expect leaders from other nations to scorn and ridicule you and your cause, expect the worst…it will come.
I have a question. Why is the State of Montana sueing anyone? Pass the law, which they did so the next step would be up to the US Federal Gov. to sue and waste their money. The Constitution trumps the Feds on State Rights and Laws and any judge that would allow this to even go to court after the state already passed the law is incompetant and has no legal grounds.
So please, someone answer me this?
MizzVikki@yahoo.com
PS. How do I go about getting something like this started in my State of NY? I know it’s a long shot, but it would sure be nice.
This new Montana law and the lawsuit to enforce it are exercises in wishful thinking, not thorough and accurate research of constitutional law. That 8 States have enacted such legislation merely shows the extent to which politicians will go to appease their pro-gun constituents. They turn a blind eye to the fact that current Federal gun controls over intrastate transactions (for example, the requirement for a dealer who only sells guns intrastate to have a Federal license) have been upheld by the courts as “affecting interstate commerce” under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
Some of the Federal laws challenged by the Firearms Freedom Act and the lawsuit
are not based on the Commerce Clause. Rather, they are lawful exercises of Congress’ constitutional authority to tax, for example, the requirement to register silencers and certain other weapons under the National Firearms Act (NFA). For purposes of the NFA it is immaterial whether a weapon has moved interstate. Any lawyer who overlooked this fact and advised otherwise is guilty of legal malpractice.
Unfortunately, the unknowing gun dealer or owner who relied upon his State’s Firearms Freedom Act will pay the ultimate price. When prosecuted in Federal court for failing to obtain the requisite Federal license or pay the Federal tax on his NFA gun transaction, he and he alone will have to cough up his fine and serve his prison sentence.
@John and Dagny Galt
Dude,
Do you not see the plumes of exhaust from the Stryker AFVs drifting toward your town hall meeting? Do you not smell the kerosene smell of the neo-con/neo-fascist M1A2 Abrams tanks as they roll into your city center? Do you not hear the steady beat of heavily armed and jack-booted thugs as they march to take your weapons, your property and any shred of dignity you may have left from you while they simultaneously crush the souls and lives of everyone and every belief you hold dear? Think that this scenario is impossible? Ha! Watch what happens when the federal government continues to usurp the power of the people that created it! Look what will happen, what MUST happen, if the federal government is to survive in its present state. It MUST destroy any last vestage of Federalism left and become the thing that the Founders thought the Constitution destroyed forever; any form of tyrannical government: a monarchy, a republic or even a state!
Montana and other states like it are doing whatever they can to stop being mere vassals of the federal government and, I think every state in the union should stop bowing to the federal government with every exercise or power NOT enumerated in the US Constitution.
@Jack Patterson
Actually the case law is not as consistent as you say. The existing case law all involves interstate transfers in one way or another. The old Roosevelt era case law on affecting interstate commerce (with respect to farming regulation) was bad law then and worse law now. I think this will pass muster. The lawsuit is stupid though.