--- On Fri, 2/5/10, Lifeforce <lifeforc...@rockymountains.net> wrote:
From: Lifeforce <lifeforc...@rockymountains.net>
Subject: Fw: ### HOW DO WE SAVE OUR COUNTRY?;States Have Lawful Power to
Nullify DeFacto Federal Usurpations; Ron Paul Commentary ###
To: "AB" <lifeforc...@rockymountains.net>
Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 9:03 AM
TIME TO SAY "NO MORE?"
Hope this one goes viral.....
Subject: Nullification: It's Official, if Congress keeps ignoring the
Constitution
Includes Ron Paul’s comments re: Nullification. Examples where it’s already
happened like with “real ID” act etc.
Nullification: It’s Official
by Derek Sheriff
This is reprinted from the Tenth <http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com>
Amendment Center.
While speaking to a large crowd of over a thousand people on the campus of
Arizona State University last December, Congressman Ron Paul mentioned one
thing that might come about as the result of the federal government habitually
ignoring the Constitution: Nullification
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/the-10th-amendment-movement/> .
About five minutes into the video segment which you'll find below, he said,
"There's not much attention paid to the Constitution in Washington. There's not
much attention paid to it by our executive branch of government. And we don't
get much protection from our courts. So one thing that might finally happen
from this if the people finally feel so frustrated that they can't get the
results out of Washington – they're going to start thinking about options. They
might start thinking about nullification and a few things like that."
As someone who attended that rally and was doing my best to represent my
state's <http://arizona.tenthamendmentcenter.com/> chapter of The Tenth
Amendment Center <http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/> , I know I cheered very
loudly and was very pleased when the rest of the crowd applauded
enthusiastically.
For anyone who is unfamiliar with the concept of state nullification, it was
the idea expressed by then sitting vice president, Thomas Jefferson, when he
authored what came to be called the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/kentucky-resolutions-of-1798/> . The
resolutions made the case that the federal government is a creature of the
states and that states have the authority to judge the constitutionality of the
federal government's laws and decrees. He also argued that states should refuse
to enforce laws which they deemed unconstitutional.
James Madison wrote a similar resolution for Virginia
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/virginia-resolution-of-1798/> that same
year, in which he asserted that whenever the federal government exceeds its
constitutional limits and begins to oppress the citizens of a state, that
state's legislature is duty bound to interpose its power to prevent the federal
government from victimizing its people. Very similar to Jefferson's concept of
nullification, Madison's doctrine of interposition differed in some small but
important ways.
These two documents together came to be known as The Virginia and Kentucky
Resolutions (or Resolves), of 1798. Both were written in response to the
dreaded Alien and Sedition Acts, and the phrase,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_%2798> "Principles of ’98" became
shorthand for nullification and/or interposition. Over time, "The Principles of
’98" would be invoked by many other states, many times for a variety of issues
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/03/04/the-states-rights-tradition-nobody-knows/>
.
Getting back to Ron Paul's speech in December at ASU, Congressman Paul
qualified his prediction about the revival of nullification by saying the
following:
"But my suspicion is that there will never be official nullification or
secession, but if the [federal] government continues to fail, and they can't
deliver anything...checks bounce...that we will be forced to take care of
ourselves. And we will be forced to almost ignore everything they do."
Less than a week after the speech I attended at ASU, Congressman Paul was
interviewed by Mike <http://www.mikechurch.com> Church on his radio show. When
Mike asked him what his thoughts were on nullification, Ron Paul responded by
saying:
"I think it’s a great idea. It was never really successful in our history. But
I think it’s going to grow in importance. And I think it’s going to grow
because the government, the federal government will be seen as inept and
ineffective. And I think it’ll almost be de facto in the sense that the states
will eventually just ignore some of the mandates."
Here I would like to pause for a moment and point out that I am not usually in
the business of disagreeing with Congressman Ron Paul. I would hardly need one
hand to count the number of times that I have actually disagreed with him on
any issue of real substance. I am a great admirer and supporter of Congressman
Paul, who is undoubtedly very supportive of the idea of state nullification,
even if he has doubted its efficacy in the past. However, in spite of all this,
I would like to make two observations.
First, nullification has, in fact, been somewhat successful in the past
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/01/08/resistance-is-not-futile-forgotten-lessons-from-the-nullification-crisis/>
and more recently
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/real-id/> as well. Second,
as President Obama loves to say, "Let me be clear": "Official" nullification
has ALREADY HAPPENED.
Before I explain why "official" nullification has already happened, let me
briefly give some examples of what nullification is NOT.
Nullification is not secession or insurrection, but neither is it unconditional
or unlimited submission. Nullification is not something that requires any
decision, statement or action from any branch of the federal government.
Nullification is not the result of obtaining a favorable court ruling.
Nullification is not the petitioning of the federal government to start doing
or to stop doing anything. Nullification doesn't depend on any federal law
being repealed. Nullification does not require permission from any person or
institution outside of one's own state.
So just what IS "official" nullification you might be asking?
Nullification begins with a decision made in your state legislature to resist a
federal law deemed to be unconstitutional. It usually involves a bill, which is
passed by both houses and is signed by your governor. In some cases, it might
be approved by the voters of your state directly, in a referendum. It may
change your state's statutory law or it might even amend your state
constitution. It is a refusal on the part of your state government to cooperate
with, or enforce any federal law it deems to be unconstitutional.
Nullification carries with it the force of state law. It cannot be legally
repealed by Congress without amending the US Constitution. It cannot be
lawfully abolished by an executive order. It cannot be overruled by the Supreme
Court. It is the people of a state asserting their constitutional rights by
acting as a political society in their highest sovereign capacity. It is the
moderate, middle way that wisely avoids harsh remedies like secession on the
one hand and slavish, unlimited submission on the other. It is the
constitutional remedy for unconstitutional federal laws.
With the exception of a Constitutional amendment, the federal government cannot
oppose (except perhaps rhetorically) , a state's decision to nullify an
unconstitutional federal law without resorting to extra-legal measures. But
such measures would more than likely backfire, since most Americans still
affirm that might does not make right.
There is no question as to whether or when "official" nullification will
happen: It has ALREADY HAPPENED. In fact, not only has it happened recently, it
has been a success! Perhaps this is why the federal government hopes you will
never hear about it. According to the Tenth Amendment Center:
"25 states over the past 2 years have passed resolutions and binding laws
denouncing and refusing to implement the Bush-era law [REAL ID Act]. While the
law is still on the books in D.C., its implementation has been “delayed”
numerous times in response to this massive state resistance, and in practice,
is virtually null and void."
But that's not all; another example of "official" nullification has occurred in
the form of an unlikely states' rights ally
<http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/01/an-unlikely-states-rights-ally-medical-marijuana/>
: Medical marijuana.
There was a time when the federal government took the Constitution seriously
enough that Congress did what is required in order to enact a nationwide ban on
a substance. Even though the experiment would eventually be seen by most
Americans as a mistake and a failure, the 18th Amendment was passed and the era
known as "Prohibition" began. Four years later, it was repealed.
When it came to marijuana prohibition, however, the feds had another trick up
their sleeve. All three branches of the federal government would agree on a
very novel, liberal interpretation of the "commerce clause" which would allow
them to regulate virtually any substance, including marijuana, even though
there’s supposedly no “legal” commerce in the plant. Since that time, the
federal government has managed to claim, with a straight face, as it were, that
a plant grown in your back yard, never sold, and never leaving your property,
is somehow able to be completely banned by the federal government under the
interstate "commerce clause." The only problem with their claim is that the
states just aren't buying it.
Fourteen states have actively refused to comply with federal laws on marijuana,
and it looks as if six more are about to join the effort. In a recent blog post
<http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/01/an-unlikely-states-rights-ally-medical-marijuana/>
, Mark Kreslins observes:
"...medical marijuana now poses a real threat to the enforcement power of the
Federal Government. With state after state defying Washington DC over this
issue.... Washington DC has a choice to make; enforce their laws based on a
very liberal interpretation of the Commerce Clause by sending thousands of DEA
agents into all fifty states…or…look the other way. Thus far, they’ve chosen to
look the other way for if they create the appearance of a Federal takeover of
police powers in the States, they will fully expose their extra-constitutiona l
behavior and provoke a direct confrontation with the States who will use the
10th Amendment (hopefully) to defend their prerogatives."
Whatever your view may be regarding marijuana use, medical or otherwise, one
thing is apparent: "Official" nullification has happened, and it works!
Washington will have to get used to it.
What remains to be seen, however, is whether in addition to "officially"
nullifying unconstitutional federal laws, state governments will be willing to
use their power to "officially" interpose themselves between agents of the
federal government and the people of their state. In the unlikely event that
one or more branches of the federal government decides to take extra-legal
measures to punish residents of a state for exercising their constitutional
rights in defiance of unconstitutional federal laws, will that state's
government have the courage to hamper or even neutralize such extra-legal
measures?
There are a whole host of peaceful actions that a state government can adopt if
that day comes or appears to be just over the horizon. These measures range
from county sheriffs requiring that federal agents receive
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/nullification/sheriffs-first-legislation/>
written permission from the sheriff before acting in their county, to setting
up a Federal Tax escrow account
<http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/01/18/resistdc-the-federal-tax-funds-act/>
, which could potentially de-fund unconstitutional federal activities by
requiring that all federal taxes come first to the state’s Department of
Revenue.
Besides state interposition, the other thing Washington would have to consider,
is whether enough of their agents would actually obey orders to punish people
for exercising their constitutional rights. There is a significant chance that
enough of them would either publicly or privately decide in advance to ignore
such orders
<http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2009/03/03/declaration-of-orders-we-will-not-obey/>
. As the probability of this increases, it becomes more likely that Washington
will not risk overplaying its hand. The reality is that Washington just doesn't
have the manpower to enforce all their unconstitutional laws if enough states
choose to defy them.
Of course, it all depends on the people of the several states: ordinary people
like you and I. Although I've discovered that there are more elected
representatives at the state level who are committed to
<http://pledge.tenthamendmentcenter.com> acting in a courageous and principled
manner than I ever dared hope, most of their peers lack such a brave
commitment. Most of them will stick their head in the sand or sit on the fence
until they determine which way the wind is blowing. And so it's our opinion,
not the opinion of the American people in aggregate, but our opinion as
citizens of our respective states, that will influence the decision of our
state representatives to either stand tall or to kneel down and knuckle under.
But do you even know the men and women who represent you? I'm not talking about
those who represent you in Washington, but rather in Phoenix, Salem,
Sacramento, Salt Lake City, Denver, Austin, Oklahoma City, Tallahassee,
Atlanta, Nashville, Richmond, Harrisburg, Indianapolis, Columbus and
Springfield.
If you don't know them, and you care about our republic, you should make it
your highest priority to get to know them and establish rapport with them as
soon as possible.
For any of you who really want to preserve our union, and at the same time
retain your rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, I can't say it any better
than 2008 presidential nominee of the Constitution Party, Chuck Baldwin:
"...it is absolutely obligatory that freedom-minded Americans refocus their
attention to electing State legislators, governors, judges and sheriffs who
will fearlessly defend their God-given liberties... as plainly and emphatically
as I know how to say it, I am telling you: ONLY THE STATES CAN DEFEND OUR
LIBERTY NOW! ...this reality means we will have to completely readjust our
thinking and priorities."
__._,_.___
_____
_______________________________________________
GeneralCongress mailing list
generalcongr...@constitutionalgov.us
http://constitutionalgov.us/mailman/listinfo/generalcongress_constitutionalgov.us
*** exposing the hidden truth for further educational research only *** CAVEAT
LECTOR *** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. NOTE:
Some links may require cut and paste into your Internet Browser. Please check
for daily real news posts and support the truth! (sorry but don't have time to
email all posts) at <http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr> http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr
or <http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2>
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2 ; You can
also subscribe to the multiple daily emails by sending an email to
<mailto:total_truth_sciences-subscr...@googlegroups.com>
total_truth_sciences-subscr...@googlegroups.com ; free book download:
<http://www.lulu.com/content/165077> http://www.lulu.com/content/165077 ***
Revealing the hidden Truth For Educational & Further Research Purposes only.
*** NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency
(NSA) may have read emails without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do
this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse, nor
protection.......... IF anyone other than the addressee of this e-mail is
reading it, you are in violation of the 1st & 4th Amendments to the
Constitution of the United States. Patriot Act 5 & H.R. 1955 Disclaimer Notice:
This post & all my past & future posts represent parody & satire & are all
intended for entertainment and amusement only. To be removed from the weekly
list, please reply with the subject line "REMOVE"
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"total_truth_sciences" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
total_truth_sciences-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences
