The repression has only just begun . We are all “Enemies of the State” if the State says so .
Published on Oct 2, 2013
” Update: The police admitted to having burned Dorner alive (but no charges were filed).
Police admit Dorner fire was set on purpose:http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow…
Follow us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/StormCloudsGathering
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/collapseupdates
Visit our website: http://StormCloudsGathering.com
Get weekly email updates: http://tinyurl.com/naturalrightsnewsl… “
” As reported by Nick Hankoff at the California Tenth Amendment Center today, AB351, the California Liberty Preservation Act has been signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown:
Assembly Bill 351, commonly called the California Liberty Preservation Act, has been signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown making it statewide policy to refuse compliance with federal attempts to enforce “indefinite detention” made famous by the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA). What began as a marginal issue with little legislative support has unified Californians of all persuasions and brought attention to the proper role the people and their states play in a constitutional republic.
AB351 now makes it state policy to reject “indefinite detention” powers from the federal government. It reads, in part:
It is the policy of this state to refuse to provide material support for or to participate in any way with the implementation within this state of any federal law that purports to authorize indefinite detention of a person within California. [emphasis added]
This language of AB351 goes far beyond what has been considered in most other states, which focus solely on indefinite detention powers under the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and nothing else. Donnelly’s legislation broadened the scope by recognizing that indefinite detention should not be complied with no matter what federal law is used to justify it. Donnelly confirmed this broad scope, “AB351 will prevent California from implementing indefinite detention for any reason.”
This can make a HUGE dent in any federal effort to detain without due process in California. As Judge Andrew Napolitano has said recently, such widespread noncompliance can make a federal law “nearly impossible to enforce” (video here). Quite simply, the federal government is going to have an extremely difficult time – at best – carrying out indefinite detention in California without the assistance of California.”
‘ With 500-some pages of text, the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) covers a lot more than just section 1021(b), but the majority of the debates over the bill involve the very reason the four letters N-D-A-A have become shorthand for fears of government power finally crossing a Rubicon. Whether or not that’s really true, the caginess of the government in respect to who it can indefinitely detain[pdf] is disturbing and demands a clarification that is not being offered.
Section 1021(b) reads that someone who can be indefinitely detained is:
A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”
If a republican president signed this the outrage would be phenomenal . Now the silence is deafening .
Not being a regular Mother Jones reader I am surprised that I am linking to them but as with the subject matter of the article it has created some strange bedfellows .
I don’t think that this is the type of bipartisanship our “rulers” have in mind .
“The revolt against the NDAA has brought together organizations and activists that disagree on almost every other issue—tea party activists, the states’ rights Tenth Amendment Center,the American Civil Liberties Union, and Occupy Wall Street protesters. The NDAA is “waking people up to the idea that the federal government shouldn’t have this kind of power,” says Michael Boldin, the director of the Tenth Amendment Center. “We’re seeing this weird mishmosh coalition of people.” In mid-April, Boldin’s group joined a number of other conservative organizations in filing a friend-of-the-court brief in support of liberal journalist Chris Hedges’ anti-NDAA lawsuit against the Obama administration. ”
Once again the wisdom of the Founders comes to light as numerous states take matters into their own hands and attempt to mitigate this grossly unconstitutional powergrab .
” The NDAA backlash has already fueled action on the state level. In Virginia, Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell recently signed a bill that could prohibit state authorities from “knowingly” aiding in the military detention of a US citizen. The Arizona Legislature passed a bill making it a misdemeanor for state officials to help the feds detain US citizens under the NDAA, and the Maine Legislature passed a joint resolution urging Congress and the president to amend the law to make it clear that Americans apprehended on US soil can’t be detained without trial. All three states have legislatures with Republican majorities. ”
This is exactly why Washington DC in general and the Obama administration in particular demonstrate such disdain for the principle of ” state’s rights ” .
We all owe a debt of gratitude to the state of Arizona , Gov. Brewer , Sheriff Arpaio and everyone else in that state for pushing back against the Feds .
The Big Stick , sticking it to us .
At this rate the Obama Administration will spend the rest of it’s days defending the indefensible before the Supremes . Obama should ask for his money back .He sure didn’t get much of a constitutional law education to go with his degree .
“PHOENIX (April 24, 2012) – Just a week after the Virginia legislature approved a law to refuse compliance with NDAA“indefinite detentions,” an Arizona lawcommitting the Grand Canyon State to noncompliance with any attempted federal kidnapping under the NDAA now stands just a signature away from implementation.”
This state and any agency of this state shall not provide material support or participate in any way with the implementation of sections 1021 and 1022 of the national defense authorization act of 2012, Public Law 112‑81, against any citizen of the United States.
“The law would also make it a criminal offense for any public officer, employee or agent of the state to make any attempt to assist in federal kidnapping.”