TexasCHLforum.com

Dave2 wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

Dave2 wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

oohrah wrote:I prefer the idea of keeping at the state level and requiring some sort of mandated reciprocity.

Just like we do for drivers licenses.

Is there mandatory reciprocity for non-commercial DL's? It's likely within the authority of Feds to do it, but I was under the impression that all 50 states just did it as a matter of practice or interstate agreement.

Yes, it's called the "full faith and credit" clause of the US constitution, which requires the states to honor each other's paperwork and licenses. No clue why some states act like like it doesn't apply to CHLs, and I don't feel like being a test case.

Full faith and credit applies to "official acts". It doesn't always apply to licenses. That's why you don't have Doctors, Lawyers, Building Contractors, etc. automatically working OOS.

Oh? I thought that was why states that don't recognize certain marriages had to recognize them anyway, if the people were married in a state that did recognize them. Is that not the case? (Seriously asking)

Marriages are "official acts" and SCOTUS said in 1967 Loving vs. Virginia states had to recognize interracial marriages performed in other states. 1997 federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) allowed states and the feds to refuse to recognize same sex marriage performed in other states, but SCOTUS invalidated that last year in Obergefell v. Hodges. Terrible logic in that one IMO, but not relevant to state licensing of driving, carrying firearms, or many other things. As far as I know, the reason that all states recognize other states' non-commercial driver's licenses is because they chose to.

Dave2 wrote:

ScottDLS wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

oohrah wrote:I prefer the idea of keeping at the state level and requiring some sort of mandated reciprocity.

Just like we do for drivers licenses.

Is there mandatory reciprocity for non-commercial DL's? It's likely within the authority of Feds to do it, but I was under the impression that all 50 states just did it as a matter of practice or interstate agreement.

Yes, it's called the "full faith and credit" clause of the US constitution, which requires the states to honor each other's paperwork and licenses. No clue why some states act like like it doesn't apply to CHLs, and I don't feel like being a test case.

Full faith and credit applies to "official acts". It doesn't always apply to licenses. That's why you don't have Doctors, Lawyers, Building Contractors, etc. automatically working OOS.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

oohrah wrote:I prefer the idea of keeping at the state level and requiring some sort of mandated reciprocity.

Just like we do for drivers licenses.

Is there mandatory reciprocity for non-commercial DL's? It's likely within the authority of Feds to do it, but I was under the impression that all 50 states just did it as a matter of practice or interstate agreement.

My point of view is there is no Constitutional basis for the Federal government to regulate the wearing of arms. It's a purely state matter as are most criminal laws. SCOTUS rejected the original Gun Free Safe School Zones Act in US vs. Lopez. Congress came back with some "interstate commerce" mumbo jumbo, and it has yet to work it's way back to the Supreme Court. Personally I think the NFA 34 and GCA 68 are overreach too, but my opinion hasn't been shared by SCOTUS...

Put it in another context...why don't we have Federal Driving Licenses? Because it's a State matter. I even think LEOSA was unconstitutional, even though it expanded gun rights (for cops).

Over the last 100 years the Federal government has massively expanded its control over all aspects of daily life at the expense of the States. It's far past time to start dialing it back.