Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Rand Paul calls for Revolt After Health Law Ruling
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so,”
State Nullification is the answer!
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so,”
State Nullification is the answer!
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Jury Nullification Passed in New Hampshire!
Alleluia!!!
This is BIG! Please, urge your state representatives NOW to do the same in your State!
Jury Nullification is an ABSOLUTE MUST if Liberty is to be restored!!!
This is an excellent way to end Obama care and any other overreaching and wicked Federal law! Juries of peers can nulify them on the spot, in the case before them!
Hurray!
Do it now, please!
"Jury nullification, in which jurors refuse to convict defendants under laws they find objectionable or inappropriately applied, is a favored tactic of many libertarians who, rightly or wrongly perceive individual liberty as, at best, a minority taste among their neighbors. They like the idea of a tool that can be wielded on the spot to shield people from powerful control freaks without first having to win a popularity contest. But nullification is useful only if people know about. And last week, New Hampshire's governor signed a law requiring the state's judges to permit defense attorneys to inform jurors of their right to nullify the law."
http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/29/new-h ... lification
Alleluia!!!
This is BIG! Please, urge your state representatives NOW to do the same in your State!
Jury Nullification is an ABSOLUTE MUST if Liberty is to be restored!!!
This is an excellent way to end Obama care and any other overreaching and wicked Federal law! Juries of peers can nulify them on the spot, in the case before them!
Hurray!
Do it now, please!
"Jury nullification, in which jurors refuse to convict defendants under laws they find objectionable or inappropriately applied, is a favored tactic of many libertarians who, rightly or wrongly perceive individual liberty as, at best, a minority taste among their neighbors. They like the idea of a tool that can be wielded on the spot to shield people from powerful control freaks without first having to win a popularity contest. But nullification is useful only if people know about. And last week, New Hampshire's governor signed a law requiring the state's judges to permit defense attorneys to inform jurors of their right to nullify the law."
http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/29/new-h ... lification
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Jury imposition is a bulwark against tyranny in defense of Liberty.
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Judge Napolitano on Nullification and the Constitutional Powers of States
Note:
definition of the word that applies to Napolitano. The better word, of course, is Liberty!
The better word, of course, is Liberty, since the 3rd definition is not widely known.
Note:
Definitions 1, 2, and 4 are negative. Definition 3, is the very definition of Freedom. And it is the 3rdan·ar·chy
[an-er-kee] Show IPA
noun
1. a state of society without government or law.
2. political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
3. a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
4. confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.
definition of the word that applies to Napolitano. The better word, of course, is Liberty!
The better word, of course, is Liberty, since the 3rd definition is not widely known.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 241
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Yeah, actually it does.LoveIsTruth wrote:...“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so,”
...
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
I can PROVE you wrong. There are MULTIPLE Supreme Court Rulings that CONTRADICT each-other.imperfectionst wrote:Yeah, actually it does.LoveIsTruth wrote:...“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so,”
...
I guess, at this point we need to define the word "constitutional." I define it thus: something is Constitutional if it is IN HARMONY with the original intent of the writers of the Constitution.
This is the only definition that makes any sense, (otherwise the Constitution is meaningless).
Under this definition, if something is constitutional at one point in time, it CANNOT become un-constitutional later, if the pertinent point of the constitution HAS NOT BEEN properly AMENDED.
We have multiple examples of such occurring, which proves that some Supreme Court decisions are INCONSISTENT, and therefore by definition UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Thomas Woods: Nullification a Tool We All Have
He should be in stand up. Nice!
He should be in stand up. Nice!
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Thomas Jefferson’s Other Declaration
In 1798 Thomas Jefferson secretly drafted another declaration few know about...
by Derek Sheriff
Most Americans know that Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of “The Declaration of Independence”, the most important of all our founding documents.
Yet few of them have even heard of another document that I would say might be the second most important declaration he ever wrote: The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. He drafted them secretly while he was serving as vice president. It was written in response to the hated Alien and Sedition Acts which were passed under the Adams administration during an undeclared war with France.
The acts authorized the president to deport any resident alien considered dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, to apprehend and deport resident aliens if their home countries were at war with the United States, and criminalized any speech which might defame Congress, the President, or bring either of them into contempt or disrepute. You could compare it to the Patriot Act, but really it was much worse. Either way, The Alien and Sedition Acts were probably Thomas Jefferson’s worst nightmare.
Some people are surprised to learn that in response to these acts, Jefferson did not hold up the First Amendment in protest. Rather he invoked the Tenth Amendment, which states that:
In other words, the Alien and Sedition Acts were acts of usurpation.
James Madison corresponded with Jefferson about these issues, (they suspected that their mail was being secretly opened and read by the way). As a result of their correspondence, James Madison penned another series of resolutions against the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were passed by the Virginia legislature in 1798 and 1799.
As important as these resolutions were in objecting to the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts, their lasting importance was due to the the fact that they were strong statements in defense of federalism, the sovereignty of the people of the several states, and the authority of state governments to check or resist the tyrannical proclivities of the federal government.
Read more: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/03 ... claration/
In 1798 Thomas Jefferson secretly drafted another declaration few know about...
by Derek Sheriff
Most Americans know that Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of “The Declaration of Independence”, the most important of all our founding documents.
Yet few of them have even heard of another document that I would say might be the second most important declaration he ever wrote: The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. He drafted them secretly while he was serving as vice president. It was written in response to the hated Alien and Sedition Acts which were passed under the Adams administration during an undeclared war with France.
The acts authorized the president to deport any resident alien considered dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, to apprehend and deport resident aliens if their home countries were at war with the United States, and criminalized any speech which might defame Congress, the President, or bring either of them into contempt or disrepute. You could compare it to the Patriot Act, but really it was much worse. Either way, The Alien and Sedition Acts were probably Thomas Jefferson’s worst nightmare.
Some people are surprised to learn that in response to these acts, Jefferson did not hold up the First Amendment in protest. Rather he invoked the Tenth Amendment, which states that:
- “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
In other words, the Alien and Sedition Acts were acts of usurpation.
James Madison corresponded with Jefferson about these issues, (they suspected that their mail was being secretly opened and read by the way). As a result of their correspondence, James Madison penned another series of resolutions against the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were passed by the Virginia legislature in 1798 and 1799.
As important as these resolutions were in objecting to the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts, their lasting importance was due to the the fact that they were strong statements in defense of federalism, the sovereignty of the people of the several states, and the authority of state governments to check or resist the tyrannical proclivities of the federal government.
Read more: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/03 ... claration/
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
US: The recent elections produced 6 victories for states' rights and nullification of unconstitutional federal laws. [Here is a list of the propositions that were passed, legalization of marijuana and relief from Obamacare.]
Tenth Amendment Center 2012 Nov 7 (Cached)
Tenth Amendment Center 2012 Nov 7 (Cached)
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
State by State, a Nullification Domino Effect
Marijuana oil has amazing medicinal properties. We should rejoice in decriminalization, because war on drugs is:
http://lewrockwell.com/orig12/poindexter9.1.1.html
Marijuana oil has amazing medicinal properties. We should rejoice in decriminalization, because war on drugs is:
- a) immoral
b) impractical
c) devastating to liberty and thus the life of the nation.
http://lewrockwell.com/orig12/poindexter9.1.1.html
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
The Michigan House of Representatives unanimously passed the NDAA nullification bill to prevent indefinite detention of American citizens by the federal government. [The bill now is headed for the state Senate.] TAC 2012 Dec 5 (Cached)
http://www.realityzone.com/currentperiod.html
http://www.realityzone.com/currentperiod.html
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Tom Woods:
Ron Paul Right, Thought Controllers Wrong, on Secession
Right on! Brilliant.
Ron Paul Right, Thought Controllers Wrong, on Secession
Right on! Brilliant.
-
- captain of 10
- Posts: 20
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
The last time a state nullified a Federal Law was in 1832 with South Carolina's Nullification Act. That prompted Doctrine and Covenants 87, in which God labeled S.C.'s act as the rebellion of South Carolina. The Prophet Joseph then predicted that South would be divided against North. The Civil War took the lives of nearly a million Americans. Be careful what you bandy about lightly. God help us all if such resulted in a similar catastophe. By the way the Lord was not using "rebellion" as a pat on the back.
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
You are wrong. Northern states were nullifying "slave fugitive act" long after 1832, which was a very wicked law that required people of northern states to capture and return fugitive slaves from the South to their owners. So a number of Northern states NULLIFIED this wicked Federal law and helped to protect the blacks who escaped slavery. So you got your history wrong, which is no wonder, because state run schools are teaching you lies. Nullification was used much more to protect blacks and Liberty in general then to impede it; and not surprisingly too, because it is a CORRECT PRINCIPLE that was first advanced by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, two of principle Founding Fathers of this nation; you might have heard of them. Here's some more facts that they did not teach you in school:General Ike wrote:The last time a state nullified a Federal Law was in 1832 with South Carolina's Nullification Act. That prompted Doctrine and Covenants 87, in which God labeled S.C.'s act as the rebellion of South Carolina. The Prophet Joseph then predicted that South would be divided against North. The Civil War took the lives of nearly a million Americans. Be careful what you bandy about lightly. God help us all if such resulted in a similar catastophe. By the way the Lord was not using "rebellion" as a pat on the back.
Thomas E Woods - Principles of 98
-
- captain of 10
- Posts: 20
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Actually the tutoring came from doctoral studies in Modern History at BYU, yea that public school. As a historian with many years of teaching and writing, the first thing I learned is that every principle, every interpretation, every opinion is debatable. When anyone demeans the opposing idea with sly asides about the others training, it is the tactic of an unethical politician not a scholar. Public schools indeed, and where did you study? Mommy's knee with graduate studies in talk radio? I've studied and contemplated the works on government from the likes of Marx and Rand. Keep working and you might get to the level of dribble. Jefferson? I've read every word he ever wrote...
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Then you didn't understand it, because he promoted the correct idea of state nullification (together with Madison). He was a smart and largely inspired man, you might learn something from him.General Ike wrote:Actually the tutoring came from doctoral studies in Modern History at BYU, yea that public school. As a historian with many years of teaching and writing, the first thing I learned is that every principle, every interpretation, every opinion is debatable. When anyone demeans the opposing idea with sly asides about the others training, it is the tactic of an unethical politician not a scholar. Public schools indeed, and where did you study? Mommy's knee with graduate studies in talk radio? I've studied and contemplated the works on government from the likes of Marx and Rand. Keep working and you might get to the level of dribble. Jefferson? I've read every word he ever wrote...
Good luck.
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Montana Lawmaker Moves to Protect Second Amendment
A Montana lawmaker is proposing amendments to the Constitution to nullify the effects of laws in the works to outlaw firearms.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/montana-law ... dment.html
A Montana lawmaker is proposing amendments to the Constitution to nullify the effects of laws in the works to outlaw firearms.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/montana-law ... dment.html
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Ret. Marine Absolutely Owns CNN Anchor On 2nd Amendment and Nullification!
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Wyoming Bill Would Nullify Obama Gun Control, Jail Feds
Alex Newman
New American
Jan 12, 2013
As the Obama administration plots various assaults on gun rights by “executive order”and legislation, proposals described as “very extreme”even by some Democrats, state lawmakers in Wyoming have another idea. Republican legislators are rallying behind nullification legislation that would void unconstitutional infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, even providing prison time for any federal agents who may try to enforce Washington, D.C., gun control in the state. Lawmakers expect it to pass.
The new bill, H.B. 0104 or the “Firearms Protection Act,” would nullify any new federal infringements on the constitutionally protected gun rights of state residents — who enjoy some of the lowest crime rates while being among the most heavily armed people in America. Unconstitutional federal gun registration schemes, as well as restrictions on semi-automatic guns or standard-capacity magazines, would also be nullified under the legislation.
There are teeth in the proposed law too: Any federal official attempting to enforce unconstitutional statutes or decrees infringing on gun rights passed after January 1 of this year would be charged with a felony. If convicted, criminal officials would be punished by up to five years in state prison and a $5,000 fine. The legislation also authorizes the state attorney general to defend citizens of Wyoming if federal authorities seek prosecutions under unconstitutional gun control rules.
At least eight state representatives and two state senators have already sponsored the legislation. And nationwide, support for similar measures is exploding. “We want to get things ahead of the game,” Republican state Rep. Kendell Kroeker, the primary sponsor of the bill, told the Huffington Post. “We take the Second Amendment seriously in Wyoming…. If the federal government is going to pass laws taking back our rights, it is our right as a state to defend those rights.”
Citing his oath to support and defend the U.S. and state constitutions, state Rep. Kroeker has been a leader in standing against lawless usurpations of power by the federal government. In a previous session, he introduced legislation to increase the use of gold as currency in the state, for example. “I take an oath to uphold, support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Wyoming,” Kroeker continued, telling reporters that his constituents and activists nationwide were thrilled by the move. “I believe it is my duty to take that oath seriously.”
In a separate interview with the Associated Press, the liberty-minded lawmaker noted that there are “a lot of people” who would seek to take all of Americans’ guns — at least if they could. The only thing restraining them, Kroeker said, is public opposition as well as other lawmakers who take their oaths seriously and are concerned about protecting the people’s unalienable rights.
“We’re a sovereign state with our own constitutional form of government,” he told the AP. “We’ve got a right to make our laws, and if the federal government is going to try to enforce unconstitutional laws on our people and take away the rights of Wyoming citizens, then we as a state are going to step up and make that a crime.” In the state Senate, another co-sponsor of the legislation, Wyoming State Senator Larry Hicks, cited the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reserves all powers not specifically granted to the federal government to the states or the people. The nullification bill, he added in an interview with the Washington Examiner, will send a message to federal politicians considering further infringements on the rights of his constituents.
“It says that your one size fits all solution doesn’t comport to what a vast majority of the state believes,” Sen. Hicks told the paper about the message federal politicians should be taking from the legislation, telling other reporters that state lawmakers were receiving e-mails in support of the bill from all across America and that citizens were urging their own states to take similar action. “I don’t think this is controversial in Wyoming at all…. I fully expect this bill to pass.”
According to the liberty-minded state senator, even if Congress refuses to budge, the administration is determined to restrict gun ownership by presidential decree. “I think that’s the biggest threat we’re facing,” he told the AP. Sen. Hicks also said that his constituents were “absolutely terrified” about threats from Washington to assault gun rights — especially Vice President Joe Biden’s pledge this week to implement the lawless attack by executive order.
“They are very, very upset that we’re going to see some level of federal takeover of our weapons and abuse of our rights given to us by the Second Amendment,” the state senator was quoted as saying, referring to his constituents. “Also, that the federal government will bypass our legislative officials and confiscate our weapons through executive order. This gives citizens of the Western United States a great deal of concern.”
The AP, in an uncharacteristically honest assessment, pointed out that Wyoming has one of the highest rates of per-capita gun ownership in America, and that it also has among the lowest levels of gun violence. “Part of it’s our culture,” Hicks explained. “Our kids grow up around firearms, and they also grow up hunting, and they know what the consequences are of taking a life. And they know at an early age, whether you hunt or fish, that there’s consequences from pulling that trigger. We’re not insulated from the real world in Wyoming.”
At least one Democrat, Rep. James Byrd, has already expressed his opposition to the plan. “If you want to pick a fight with the feds, let’s pick a fight with the feds that’s about something that means something,” he was quoted as saying by the AP while claiming to be a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment. It was not immediately clear why Byrd thought the unalienable right to keep and bear arms — enshrined in both the Wyoming and U.S. constitutions — was not meaningful.
Predictably, Obama apparatchiks funded by billionaire statist George Soros are already crying foul, too. The far-left “Think Progress” blog, for example, claimed that nullification would be unconstitutional. “The constitution actually stipulates that federal law ‘shall be the supreme law of the land,’” Annie-Rose Strasser alleged falsely, without pointing out the constitutional stipulation that federal laws must be “made in pursuance” with the Constitution. It was not clear whether the writer was simply ignorant of American history and the U.S. Constitution, or whether the false statements were deliberate lies in an effort to confuse readers.
Some analysts quoted in the establishment press, also presumably unfamiliar with history or the U.S. Constitution, have claimed that states may not nullify unconstitutional federal usurpations as well. Of course, American history is replete with examples of nullification — Wisconsin nullified a federal statute purporting to require the return of escaped slaves to their masters, for example. Even Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson helped states void unconstitutional legislation in the early years of the Republic.
More recently, states all across America have been putting their foot down. Even causes traditionally associated with liberals, such as marijuana legalization, have succeeded through nullification — Colorado and Washington state both legalized the controversial plant in November, and many other states have approved it for medical use in spite of unconstitutional federal statutes. Conservatives and libertarians have also been relying on nullification, especially in recent years.
As the increasingly out-of-control federal government tries to restrict more and more of Americans’ unalienable rights — with the Second Amendment just the latest target — state lawmakers all across the country are taking action. A bill just introduced in Indiana known as the Firearm Freedom Act, for instance, would also protect the rights of gun owners to be free from federal regulations if the gun was produced and purchased in the state. Similar legislation has already been adopted in other states.
Meanwhile, law-enforcement officials, such as sheriffs and police chiefs, are also developing legal strategies to protect gun rights in their jurisdictions, with some lobbying for nullification measuresas well. As The New American reported this week, while the Obama administration seeks to severely infringe on the Second Amendment, talk of mass resistance nationwide is growing in tandem. The president may believe he can violate the Constitution by decree, but it appears that many states have had just about enough of the lawlessness. If Congress refuses to rein in the out-of-control administration, state governments may have to do it instead.
Alex Newman
New American
Jan 12, 2013
As the Obama administration plots various assaults on gun rights by “executive order”and legislation, proposals described as “very extreme”even by some Democrats, state lawmakers in Wyoming have another idea. Republican legislators are rallying behind nullification legislation that would void unconstitutional infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, even providing prison time for any federal agents who may try to enforce Washington, D.C., gun control in the state. Lawmakers expect it to pass.
The new bill, H.B. 0104 or the “Firearms Protection Act,” would nullify any new federal infringements on the constitutionally protected gun rights of state residents — who enjoy some of the lowest crime rates while being among the most heavily armed people in America. Unconstitutional federal gun registration schemes, as well as restrictions on semi-automatic guns or standard-capacity magazines, would also be nullified under the legislation.
There are teeth in the proposed law too: Any federal official attempting to enforce unconstitutional statutes or decrees infringing on gun rights passed after January 1 of this year would be charged with a felony. If convicted, criminal officials would be punished by up to five years in state prison and a $5,000 fine. The legislation also authorizes the state attorney general to defend citizens of Wyoming if federal authorities seek prosecutions under unconstitutional gun control rules.
At least eight state representatives and two state senators have already sponsored the legislation. And nationwide, support for similar measures is exploding. “We want to get things ahead of the game,” Republican state Rep. Kendell Kroeker, the primary sponsor of the bill, told the Huffington Post. “We take the Second Amendment seriously in Wyoming…. If the federal government is going to pass laws taking back our rights, it is our right as a state to defend those rights.”
Citing his oath to support and defend the U.S. and state constitutions, state Rep. Kroeker has been a leader in standing against lawless usurpations of power by the federal government. In a previous session, he introduced legislation to increase the use of gold as currency in the state, for example. “I take an oath to uphold, support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Wyoming,” Kroeker continued, telling reporters that his constituents and activists nationwide were thrilled by the move. “I believe it is my duty to take that oath seriously.”
In a separate interview with the Associated Press, the liberty-minded lawmaker noted that there are “a lot of people” who would seek to take all of Americans’ guns — at least if they could. The only thing restraining them, Kroeker said, is public opposition as well as other lawmakers who take their oaths seriously and are concerned about protecting the people’s unalienable rights.
“We’re a sovereign state with our own constitutional form of government,” he told the AP. “We’ve got a right to make our laws, and if the federal government is going to try to enforce unconstitutional laws on our people and take away the rights of Wyoming citizens, then we as a state are going to step up and make that a crime.” In the state Senate, another co-sponsor of the legislation, Wyoming State Senator Larry Hicks, cited the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which reserves all powers not specifically granted to the federal government to the states or the people. The nullification bill, he added in an interview with the Washington Examiner, will send a message to federal politicians considering further infringements on the rights of his constituents.
“It says that your one size fits all solution doesn’t comport to what a vast majority of the state believes,” Sen. Hicks told the paper about the message federal politicians should be taking from the legislation, telling other reporters that state lawmakers were receiving e-mails in support of the bill from all across America and that citizens were urging their own states to take similar action. “I don’t think this is controversial in Wyoming at all…. I fully expect this bill to pass.”
According to the liberty-minded state senator, even if Congress refuses to budge, the administration is determined to restrict gun ownership by presidential decree. “I think that’s the biggest threat we’re facing,” he told the AP. Sen. Hicks also said that his constituents were “absolutely terrified” about threats from Washington to assault gun rights — especially Vice President Joe Biden’s pledge this week to implement the lawless attack by executive order.
“They are very, very upset that we’re going to see some level of federal takeover of our weapons and abuse of our rights given to us by the Second Amendment,” the state senator was quoted as saying, referring to his constituents. “Also, that the federal government will bypass our legislative officials and confiscate our weapons through executive order. This gives citizens of the Western United States a great deal of concern.”
The AP, in an uncharacteristically honest assessment, pointed out that Wyoming has one of the highest rates of per-capita gun ownership in America, and that it also has among the lowest levels of gun violence. “Part of it’s our culture,” Hicks explained. “Our kids grow up around firearms, and they also grow up hunting, and they know what the consequences are of taking a life. And they know at an early age, whether you hunt or fish, that there’s consequences from pulling that trigger. We’re not insulated from the real world in Wyoming.”
At least one Democrat, Rep. James Byrd, has already expressed his opposition to the plan. “If you want to pick a fight with the feds, let’s pick a fight with the feds that’s about something that means something,” he was quoted as saying by the AP while claiming to be a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment. It was not immediately clear why Byrd thought the unalienable right to keep and bear arms — enshrined in both the Wyoming and U.S. constitutions — was not meaningful.
Predictably, Obama apparatchiks funded by billionaire statist George Soros are already crying foul, too. The far-left “Think Progress” blog, for example, claimed that nullification would be unconstitutional. “The constitution actually stipulates that federal law ‘shall be the supreme law of the land,’” Annie-Rose Strasser alleged falsely, without pointing out the constitutional stipulation that federal laws must be “made in pursuance” with the Constitution. It was not clear whether the writer was simply ignorant of American history and the U.S. Constitution, or whether the false statements were deliberate lies in an effort to confuse readers.
Some analysts quoted in the establishment press, also presumably unfamiliar with history or the U.S. Constitution, have claimed that states may not nullify unconstitutional federal usurpations as well. Of course, American history is replete with examples of nullification — Wisconsin nullified a federal statute purporting to require the return of escaped slaves to their masters, for example. Even Founding Fathers like Thomas Jefferson helped states void unconstitutional legislation in the early years of the Republic.
More recently, states all across America have been putting their foot down. Even causes traditionally associated with liberals, such as marijuana legalization, have succeeded through nullification — Colorado and Washington state both legalized the controversial plant in November, and many other states have approved it for medical use in spite of unconstitutional federal statutes. Conservatives and libertarians have also been relying on nullification, especially in recent years.
As the increasingly out-of-control federal government tries to restrict more and more of Americans’ unalienable rights — with the Second Amendment just the latest target — state lawmakers all across the country are taking action. A bill just introduced in Indiana known as the Firearm Freedom Act, for instance, would also protect the rights of gun owners to be free from federal regulations if the gun was produced and purchased in the state. Similar legislation has already been adopted in other states.
Meanwhile, law-enforcement officials, such as sheriffs and police chiefs, are also developing legal strategies to protect gun rights in their jurisdictions, with some lobbying for nullification measuresas well. As The New American reported this week, while the Obama administration seeks to severely infringe on the Second Amendment, talk of mass resistance nationwide is growing in tandem. The president may believe he can violate the Constitution by decree, but it appears that many states have had just about enough of the lawlessness. If Congress refuses to rein in the out-of-control administration, state governments may have to do it instead.
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
- LoveIsTruth
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5497
Re: Nullification - Constitutional Amendment
Yoohoo, Go Utah!
28 out of 29 Utah sheriffs have signed a letter to Obama proclaiming they are willing to trade their lives to uphold the traditional interpretation of the Constitution. [They specifically mentioned the Second Amendment and said they will refuse to enforce gun confiscation.] CNS News 2013 Jan 22 (Cached)
28 out of 29 Utah sheriffs have signed a letter to Obama proclaiming they are willing to trade their lives to uphold the traditional interpretation of the Constitution. [They specifically mentioned the Second Amendment and said they will refuse to enforce gun confiscation.] CNS News 2013 Jan 22 (Cached)
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM
-
- Gnolaum ∞
- Posts: 16479
- Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM