Thanks for the link, beckett. RE: Miller (1939). This was a case of country-boy-run-amok-moonshiner types got caught by the Treasury Department for operating a clandestine still. It was all about formal paperwork, and the payment of a fee. I gather the boys in West Virginia (?) just didn't get that part.
And little did they know that the personal arms they were bearing at the time were illegal on two counts: No registration/no tax transaction had ever occurred; and their gun barrels had been illegally trimmed.
Oh, there actually was a third count: "interstate commerce."
None of the above matters. The absol;utely, positively fundamental fact remains -- If you can get before the Supreme Court of the United States of America, it is ONLY because you have STANDING in such Court.
People who argue that United States v. Miller was a triumph for the "collective [state's] right" theory of 2A have to explain how Miller -- not then or ever before a member of anybody's state militia, not to mention the buddy he had with him at the time -- got standing before the Supreme Court. SCOTUS only takes constitutional cases where the rules of jurisprudential standing obtain. If it's a 2A case, and a non-militia type gets due process -- at Supreme Court Level no less!!! -- then you got to figure, 2A jurisprudence cannot possibly be confined to the realm of personal service in a militia.
Miller had standing. as a PERSON, as HIMSELF. The Court itself said so, merely by taking his case. End of story.
Good night beckett. Peace and love, bb.
If SCOTUS takes this, Sarah Brady is gonna have a long term nightmare.
BB - I really like this reasoning. I have never seen this argument before. Well done.
All the best,