” Arizona’s state senate panel approved a bill withdrawing state support for intelligence agencies’ collection of metadata and banning the use of warrantless data in courts. The panel becomes the first legislative body in US to try and thwart NSA spying.
The bill will now have to be approved by majority of the Senate Rules committee before it can move on to the full senate. It prohibits Arizona public employees and departments from helping intelligence agencies collect records of phone-calls and emails, as well as metadata (information on where and when the phone calls were made).
The bill is entitled the 4th Amendment Protection Act and was introduced by Republican Senator Kelli Ward of Lake Havasu City. It was passed on Monday by the Senate’s Government and Environment committee with a 4-2 vote.
“The 10th Amendment allows states to stand up against unconstitutional federal law,” Ward said, as cited by AP. “It’s a state issue because many times the NSA is turning that information over to our local and state law enforcement and using that in cases that are basic criminal prosecutions, not anything to do with terrorism.” ”
Tag Archive: States Rights
” We’re well on our way to reaching our goals for 2014. We’ve made some great progress, and we’re gaining momentum every day.
States That Have Filed or Pre-Filed the COS Application
State Bill # Alabama HJR49 Alaska HJR 22 Arizona HCR2027 Florida SM 0476 Georgia SR 736 New Mexico HJR 2 South Carolina H 4372 South Dakota HJR 1005 Virginia HJ9
” States That Have Passed the COS Application through One or Both Houses
States with Statewide Volunteer Leadership
Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin.
Click here if you want to contact your statewide leadership. Simply create a profile, update your address, and click the “Leaders” tab.
Click here if you want more information about signing up for one of our leadership positions.”
” We see four major abuses perpetrated by the federal government.
These abuses are not mere instances of bad policy. They are driving us towards an age of “soft tyranny” in which the government does not shatter men’s wills but “softens, bends, and guides” them. If we do nothing to halt these abuses, we run the risk of becoming, as Alexis de Tocquevill warned in 1840, nothing more than “a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.” (Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1840) “
The four main abuses are :
1. The Spending and Debt Crisis
2. The Regulatory Crisis
3. Congressional Attacks on State Sovereignty
4. Federal Takeover of the Decision-Making Process
Learn more here and you can watch this very informative video which provides a concise overview of the Convention Of States movement .
Article V of the Constitution describes the amendment process which can be accomplished in one of two ways . Since Congress is corrupt and can not be expected to make the changes necessary to lessen their own power , that leaves the second method , which the Founders were so prescient in recognizing the need for … granting the states the power to force the Federal Congress to abide by the Constitution . Below is the text of Article V:
” The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, also as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”
Wikipedia provides us with a synopsis of how Article V works:
” Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification.
Amendments may be adopted and sent to the states for ratification by either:
- Two-thirds (supermajority) of both the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States Congress;
- By a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds (at present 34) of the states.
To become part of the Constitution, an amendment must be ratified by either (as determined by Congress):
- The legislatures of three-fourths (at present 38) of the states;
- State ratifying conventions in three-fourths (at present 38) of the states.
Given the state of political corruption and the “old boy” network ruling the halls of power in DC , invoking Article V from the Convention of States point of view would seem to be the most promising hope for bringing about real change in the power structure of this nation and returning us to the principles of limited government as envisioned by our Founding Fathers and restoring us to a Constitutional Republic .
” The Florida legislature will consider a bill that would prohibit any state agency from cooperating with enforcement of any federal gun laws – past, present or future.
Rep. Dan Eagle (R-Cape Coral) introduced HB733 on Monday. The Second Amendment Preservation Act declares that no agent of the state or its political subdivisions may participate with or assist federal agents in the enforcement of federal firearms laws, or provide material support of any kind to federal agents in the enforcement of these laws. State agents and/or contractors who knowingly participate in or provide support for the enforcement of federal firearms laws would be subject to dismissal.
“ The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution expressly provides that all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. Time and time again, Florida has proven that we have the best solutions to our own issues, whether it be healthcare, education, or our balanced budget, which is accomplished without raising taxes. When it comes to protecting our fundamental Second Amendment rights guaranteed by the Constitution, I believe it is best left to be handled by Floridians for Floridians,” Eagle said.
In Florida, take action to support HB733 HERE
All other states, take action to get your state on board, and protect the 2nd Amendment HERE ”
Read more at the Tenth Amendment Center
” Close to 100 legislators from 32 states met in Mount Vernon, Va., Saturday to discuss the possibility of adding amendments to the U.S. Constitution through a convention of the states.
Such a convention, as outlined in article five of the Constitution, would allow state legislatures to vote on amendments to add.
No constitutional amendment has been added this way, but some say the Constitution specifically allows for states to use the convention as a means to push back against the federal government.
Two-thirds of the state legislatures, or 34, must approve an application for a convention to occur, according to the Constitution’s article five. State legislatures would then send delegates to the convention, each state getting one vote on proposed amendments. For an amendment to pass and become a part of the Constitution, it would have to be approved by three-fourths, or 38, of the state legislatures.”
You can read much more about the gathering at Red Millennial and here the CoS Facebook page and here is a link to the Convention Of States Project website whose stated goal is :
” The COS Project seeks to urge and empower state legislators to call a convention of states. The delegates at such a convention would have the power to propose amendments to the Constitution that would curb the abuses of the federal government. Article V of the Constitution gives them this power; the COS Project will give them an avenue through which they can use it. “
If curbing the abuses of the federal Leviathan is the goal of the CoS then you can count us in , assuming of course that this isn’t going to be yet another example of governmental “unintended consequences” . On thing we can say about the Convention is that in doing some research into this post we have discovered that the Daily Kos considers it a threat and that the effort has been greatly inspired by both Mark Levin and Glenn Beck .
That right there is a huge check in the plus column so perhaps this idea has merit . It certainly indicates that we need to be paying more attention to this whole concept .
We would very much like to publicize the states and representatives that were in attendance this past weekend at Mt Vernon but could not find such information anywhere in our searches . If a reader knows of such information we would be eternally grateful for a link .
” Writing for the Tenth Amendment Center, a person finds oneself spending a lot of time and pixels defending the concept of nullification. These defenses generally take the form of answers to two questions. Is nullification a legally valid concept? Is nullification a good idea? The arguments about whether or not nullification is a good idea can often be split into whether it’s a good idea from a practical sense, and whether it’s a good idea from the philosophical sense.
In this essay, I will address all of those questions. First, using a single argument, which I believe is conclusive, I will demonstrate that nullification is, indisputably, a valid legal concept under our political system. Having accomplished that, I will next show that under our foundational principles, nullification is a philosophical necessity. Finally, I will advance an argument that the use of nullification will lead to an overall healthier society.
Nullification is how the states can increase anti-fragility in our political and economic systems. Washington wants to increase its own ability to thrive from the unexpected by diminishing ours. The states can, and should, use nullification to resist that tendency, force decentralization, and decrease our political system’s exposure to catastrophic harm. Eventually, this country will be exposed to an existential crisis, a black swan – as Taleb terms it. Maybe in our lifetimes, maybe in our children’s or grandchildren’s. Exactly when it will happen, no one knows, but it will happen. When it happens, antifragility will determine the survivors. If we do nothing to decrease fragility in our political and economic systems, we are in grave danger. Nullification is the most effective tool to decentralize powers which have been usurped by a recalcitrant federal government. “
” Unless a handful of wavering Democrats change their minds, the Republican-controlled Missouri legislature is expected to enact a statute next month nullifying all federal gun laws in the state and making it a crime for federal agents to enforce them here. A Missourian arrested under federal firearm statutes would even be able to sue the arresting officer.
The law amounts to the most far-reaching states’ rights endeavor in the country, the far edge of a growing movement known as “nullification” in which a state defies federal power.
The Missouri Republican Party thinks linking guns to nullification works well, said Matt Wills, the party’s director of communications, thanks in part to the push by President Obama for tougher gun laws. “It’s probably one of the best states’ rights issues that the country’s got going right now,” he said.”
” Infuriated by what they see as the long arm of Washington reaching into their business, states are increasingly telling the feds: Keep out!
Bills that would negate a variety of federal laws have popped up this year in the vast majority of states – with the amount of anti-federal legislation sharply on the rise during the Obama administration, according to experts.
The “nullification” trend in recent years has largely focused on three areas: gun control; health care; and national standards for driver’s licenses. It’s touched off fierce fights within the states, and between the states and the feds, as well as raising questions and court battles about whether any of it is legal.”
” An Associated Press analysis found that about four-fifths of the states now have enacted local laws that directly reject or ignore federal laws on marijuana use, gun control, health insurance requirements and identification standards for driver’s licenses. The recent trend began in Democratic leaning California with a 1996 medical marijuana law and has proliferated lately in Republican strongholds like Kansas, where Gov. Sam Brownback this spring became the first to sign a measure threatening felony charges against federal agents who enforce certain firearms laws in his state.
“The states created this federal monster, and so it’s time for the states to get their monster on a leash,” said Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that local police could not be compelled to carry out provisions of a federal gun control law. But some states are now attempting to take that a step further by asserting that certain federal laws can’t even be enforced by federal authorities.
Yet states may never need to prosecute federal agents in order to make their point.
If enough states resist, “it’s going to be very difficult for the federal government to force their laws down our throats,” Boldin said.”
” Support for decentralizing power and rolling back overreaching federal acts continues to gain traction within the “mainstream” political establishment. Even some who generally support the DC-centric system seem to be recognizing that the federal government has completely torn itself away from the constitutional moorings meant to limit its power.
Friedman’s Huffington Post article stands out in its consistent application of constitutional principle across the political aisle. The NYU professor grasps what eludes many American partisans: if the feds can control marijuana, they can control weed – and vice versa. And maybe they shouldn’t exercise quite so much control.
Friedman opens his article outlining the recent Kansas law nullifying federal gun acts, specifically provisions involving firearms manufactured and remaining within the state. He even includes the obligatory misapplication of the supremacy clause. But then, he suddenly goes all “tenther” on us.
Still, Kansas may be on to something. As the brewing collision of federal and state marijuana laws makes clear, there has to be some room for the states to have a say in what goods their citizens can possess and use. Eighteen states have legalized marijuana for medical purposes, and Washington and Colorado just did so even for recreational use. The problem is, what Colorado allows, federal law prohibits. Can the states opt-out from the federal laws?
But Friedman proposes a solution that illustrates the root of the problem: allowing the federal government to determine the extent of its own power.”
” The South Carolina state House passed a bill Wednesday that declares President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to be “null and void,” and criminalizes its implementation.
The state’s Freedom of Health Care Protection Act intends to “prohibit certain individuals from enforcing or attempting to enforce such unconstitutional laws; and to establish criminal penalties and civil liability for violating this article.”
” In a May 2 column [Alabama State Senate Embraces Crackpot, Antebellum Legal Theory], Robert Schlesinger relegated the idea of nullification to the historical trash heap. But if James Madison and Thomas Jefferson strolled down the streets of D.C. today, listening to current political discourse, they’d likely declare conventional wisdom holding the federal government supreme in all it does a “crackpot post-antebellum legal theory.”
Even Alexander Hamilton would undoubtedly express shock. After all, he was one of the first Constitution defenders to point out the limits of federal supremacy in Federalist 33.
Thirteen independent sovereign political societies came together to form the United States, delegating specific powers to a general government. Both supporters and opponents of the Constitution agreed the new government was to remain limited. The ratification debate revolved around one question: Would the Constitution create the limited government intended?
When anti-federalists insisted the government wouldn’t remain constrained, Madison countered that the states would serve as a check. In Federalist 46, he wrote that state “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” and “legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions” would serve to “present obstructions.”
- They Don’t Know What They Don’t Know (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- AG Holder: Feds Will Ignore State Laws and Enforce Gun Grab (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
- Nullification Provides Needed Check on Federal Power (usnews.com)
- Resolutions of 1798: Guideposts of Limited Government (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Nullification – The Rightful Remedy and Our Last Hope (ncrenegade.com)
- Kansas Gov. Insists it’s OK to Ignore Federal Gun Laws (browardnetonline.com)
Colorado Lawmakers – Secret Service Must Arrest Local Sheriffs For Failing To Enforce An Unenforceable LawGraphic by Michelle Morin
” The furor over the signing into law of Senate Bill 13-013 earlier this week by Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper went viral following the publishing ofan article by Mike Opelka at theblaze.com. Opelka suggested that the new law could be “used to arrest or force county sheriffs to enforce the state’s new gun laws,” whether they wanted to or not.
It was fanned into white heat when World News Daily quoted Colorado State Representative Lori Saine who exclaimed:
This is insane! In theory if a Secret Service agent is in a county where the sheriff has refused to enforce some of the recent unenforceable gun laws, the agent could [ignore the sheriff entirely and] arrest any individual if he believes the law has been broken…
I believe it is intended to be used for setting up a framework so that at some other time they could expand it to possibly include being able to arrest a sheriff who is refusing to enforce unconstitutional laws.
Charley Barnes, writing at K99.com in Denver, further fanned the controversy last Monday when he wrote:
By the sounds of it, Colorado is being targeted with an attempt to set up loopholes that will allow the U.S. Secret Service to arrest and remove an elected sheriff for refusing to enforce the law, or anyone [else] breaking the law.”
- State Grants Secret Service Vast New Powers to Circumvent Sheriffs (joemiller.us)
- Governor of Colorado About to Give Secret Service Power to Arrest Sheriffs (lunaticoutpost.com)
- Colorado sheriffs: Sorry, but these new gun laws would be kind of unenforceable (hotair.com)
- NONE FOR YOU: State Grants Secret Service Vast New Gun Grabbing Powers (secretsofthefed.com)
- Colorado sheriff says he won’t enforce ‘unenforceable’ new gun grab laws (twitchy.com)
” On March 12 and 14, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed both Sen. Charles Schumer’s (D-NY) “Fix Gun Checks Act,” which would criminalize all private firearm sales and Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) “Assault Weapons Ban.”
These bills have a long way to go before they become law – if they ever do – but states across the nation are introducing their own legislation to preemptively defeat any new federal gun laws.
In Ohio, two senators have introduced SB36, which would prohibit firearms seizures, registration and bans in their state.
Sen. Jared Carpenter introduced a bill that would prohibit Kentucky from enforcing new federal gun control laws if they’re enacted. The measure passed by a vote of 34-3.”
- Ted Cruz And Dianne Feinstein Battle In Explosive Debate Over Gun Control In Senate: ‘I Am Not A 6th Grader’ (mediaite.com)
- H●ȴȴɣwͼͽd added a discussion to the group Guns and Tactics (12160.info)
- Growing Number Of States Eye Bills To Defy Federal Gun Laws (secretsofthefed.com)
- Growing Number of States Introduce Bills To Defy Unconstitutional Federal Gun Laws (patdollard.com)
” An Oklahoma bill known as the Firearms Freedom Act has successfully passed the state’s House panel with a whopping 13-0 vote, signifying a great start for the bill that protects Oklahoma citizens from federal laws or regulations concerning guns and ammunition.
Around eight states already have signed into law similar bills defending the Second Amendment rights of the public, and Oklahoma could keep this going strong. If you’ve been following this bill, you may be aware that the ultimate passing of this bill into law can signify some serious change that will surely reverberate throughout the nation and spark similar legislation that may be introduced and adopted in an even greater number of states. Of course the flip side of this is that if this bill is crushed, it will limit the chances of other states following the move successfully. With a vote of 13-0 by the panel, however, it is a good sign for sure.
Right now, a dozen other states are at some stage in the process of ruling on similar bills. The site FireArmsFreedomAct has provided a graphic that highlights the states as of February 9th, 2013:”
- Oklahoma Bill Protecting Guns From Federal Seizure Passes House Panel (storyleak.com)
- Oklahoma House Committee Passes Firearms Freedom Act, 13-0 (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Oklahoma guns exempted from federal rules in bill OK’d by House panel (newsok.com)
- A Brief and Bloody History of Gun Control Read more: http://www.storyleak.com/a-brief-and-bloody-history-of-gun-control/#ixzz2LkOGvaKz (storyleak.com)
- Oklahoma House Committee Passes Obamacare Nullification, 7-3 (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Dozens of gun bills filed in Oklahoma house (kfor.com)
- Concealed-carry Bill Signed into Law by Acting AR Governor (arkansasmatters.com)
A thorough , detailed and link-filled post on why nullification is not only feasible but our right . Very much worth your time .
” Nullification deniers such as Matthew Spalding of Heritage Foundation, Jarrett Stepman of Human Events, law professor Randy Barnett, David Barton of Wallbuilders, and history professor Allen C. Guelzo, say that nullification by States of unconstitutional acts of the federal government is unlawful and impossible. They make the demonstrably false assertions that:
- States don’t have the right to nullify unconstitutional acts of the federal government because our Constitution doesn’t say they can do it;
- Nullification is literally impossible;
- The supreme Court is the final authority on what is constitutional and what is not; and The States and The People must submit to whatever the supreme Court says; and
- James Madison, Father of Our Constitution, opposed nullification.
Their assertions contradict our Declaration of Independence, The Federalist Papers, our federal Constitution, and what James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton really said.
What are the Two Conditions Precedent for Nullification?
The deniers seem unaware of the two conditions our Framers saw must be present before nullification is proper and possible. These conditions are important – you will see why!:
- The act of the federal government must be unconstitutional – usually a usurpation of a power not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution; and
- The act must be something The States or The People can “nullify”- i.e., refuse to obey: the act mustorder them to do something or not do something.
What is “Interposition” and What is “Nullification”? “
Read The Whole Thing
- Wyoming NDAA Nullification Passes Out of Committee (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Nullification The Rightful Remedy – YouTube (chasvoice.blogspot.com)
- Nullification : An Idea Who’s Time Has Come (youviewed.com)
- The Path to Saving the Republic: Just Say ‘No’ (americanthinker.com)
- Nullification: The Basics (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- There’s More Than One Way to Nullify (txwclp.org)
” The Daily Caller has published a report that suggests that Obamacare is under serious threat, due to half of states refusing
to establish healthcare exchanges. The article suggests a pressure point for the massive healthcare program that could send the legislation back to the Supreme
” A movement to stop unconstitutional violations of gun rights by refusing to enforce unjust laws is slowly gaining momentum.
Last week, we saw the positive news of a small town Chief of Police in Pennsylvania who is proposing an ordinance to ‘preserve the 2nd Amendment’ and nullify any and all policies or attempts at enforcement from the federal, state or local level that violate the right to keep and bear arms.
Now, as predicted, others are modeling legislation on this same, or at least similar, grounds.
Members of Wyoming’s state government are introducing bills to uphold the 2nd Amendment as well. K2Radio.com reports:
Several Wyoming lawmakers are proposing legislation designed to protect gun-owners from any potential federal firearm ban. The “Firearms Protection Act” bill, introduced this week, would make any federal law banning semi-automatic firearms or limiting the size of gun magazines unenforceable within the state’s boundaries. “
Police Chief Secures 2nd Amendment with Ordinance
- Wyoming Proposes Jail Time for Feds Who Violate The 2nd Amendment (forlibertysake.wordpress.com)
- Wyoming Lawmakers Propose ‘Gun Protection’ Legislation (k2radio.com)
- Wyoming Threatens Arrests For Federal Gun Grabbers (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
- Wyoming to Preserve the Second Amendment? (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Wyoming Lawmakers Propose Legislation to Protect Gun Owners From Federal Firearms Ban (thegatewaypundit.com)
- Wyoming’s Firearms Protection Act: Wyoming Proposes Jail time for Feds who Enforce Gun Laws (offgridsurvival.com)
- Wyoming Lawmakers Propose ‘Gun Protection’ Legislation To Thwart Obama (patdollard.com)
- Police Chief Seeks Nullification of Unconstitutional Gun Control (thenewamerican.com)
- Pennsylvania Town Working To Nullify Federal Gun Control (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Pennsylvania Police Chief Proposes ’2nd Amendment Preservation’ Ordinance (dprogram.net)
” South Carolina Sen. Lee Bright (R-Spartanburg) has reintroduced a bill that would exempt any firearm, accessory or ammunition manufactured and kept within the borders of the Palmetto State from federal regulations.
Invoking states rights under the 9th and 10th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Bright’s legislation – known as the ‘South Carolina Firearms Freedom Act’ – states:
“A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in South Carolina and that remains within the borders of South Carolina is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce.”
” The ‘Firearms Freedom Act’ movement has its origins in Montana, where a gun maker by the name of Gary Marbut got sick and tired of the federal government’s overreach with respect to his business. After closely examining the Constitution, in particular the commerce clause, Marbut conceived the Firearms Freedom Act in 2009. “
- Will South Carolina Nullify Federal Gun Laws? (chasvoice.blogspot.com)
- Bill Would Exempt SC Made Guns From Federal Rules (charlotte.cbslocal.com)
- SC Senator Lee Bright Introduces Legislation To Nullify Federal Gun Laws | THE JEENYUS CORNER (jeenyuscorner.com)
- Will South Carolina Nullify Federal Gun Laws? (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
- Bill would exempt guns, ammo made in SC from federal regulations (chronicle.augusta.com)
- BATFE Taking Comments on a Pending Ban Ammo (ammoland.com)
Mike Maharrey on the origins of the Republican party and it’s integral association with state’s rights and nullification .
Remember who fought to end slavery (republicans) and who fought to deny equal rights to the black man based on the color of his skin (democrats).
And remember that the democrats efforts to combat equal rights continued for over a century after the slaves were freed .
Bull Conner , George Wallace and Robert (grand kleagle) Byrd were democrats after all .
Mr . Maharrey demonstrates the utility of the nullification process in asserting the sovereignty of the states and how that power can be put to work in ending the threat to individual liberty that is Obamacare .
” The Republican Party grew from the soil of state sovereignty and nullification. Now is the time for
Republicans to rediscover those roots and support state nullification of the federal health
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 .