i have never forked out $600 for a deer tag yet,and so far montana is way down my list for "bang for the buck",,,montana has not got my non-res moneys for quite a few years now,,there are others at a more reasonable price vs quality i feel
I believe the commerce clause, was intended for commercial purposes, not recreational purposes. I.E. commercial fishing. The ninth circuit has been notorious for their far left agenda for some time.
The Dormant or Negative Commerce Clause, which prohibits a state from burdening interstate commerce, is not directly found in any 41 constitutional provision. Instead, courts have inferred the Dormant Commerce Clause from Article I, Section 8, which states in part, "Congress shall have Power ... [t]o regulate Commerce ... among the several states."5°
S. 339 makes the commerce clause irrelevant and reaffirms the states right to discriminate against NR hunters anyway they see fit.
In reference to the commerce clause Sec. 2(b)...
S. 339 Reaffirming the authority of States Regulate hunting and fishing activities
To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and fishing activities.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Reaffirmation of State Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and Fishing Act of 2005'.
SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL SILENCE.
(a) In General- It is the policy of Congress that it is in the public interest for each State to continue to regulate the taking for any purpose of fish and wildlife within its boundaries, including by means of laws or regulations that differentiate between residents and nonresidents of such State with respect to the availability of licenses or permits for taking of particular species of fish or wildlife, the kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that may be taken, or the fees charged in connection with issuance of licenses or permits for hunting or fishing.
(b) Construction of Congressional Silence- Silence on the part of Congress shall not be construed to impose any barrier under clause 3 of Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as the `commerce clause') to the regulation of hunting or fishing by a State or Indian tribe.
SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed--
(1) to limit the applicability or effect of any Federal law related to the protection or management of fish or wildlife or to the regulation of commerce;
(2) to limit the authority of the United States to prohibit hunting or fishing on any portion of the lands owned by the United States; or
(3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, supersede or alter any treaty-reserved right or other right of any Indian tribe as recognized by any other means, including, but not limited to, agreements with the United States, Executive Orders, statutes, and judicial decrees, and by Federal law.
SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED.
For purposes of this Act, the term `State' includes the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.