How to Stop the ‘Immigration’ Bill via States

Self | 13 Jun 13 | Me

[OneWingedShark]

Now is our chance to change the political field of battle; the recent revelations regarding the IRS's political targeting and the NSA's domestic spying have engendered a healthy distrust of the now feral Federal Government. - We have the opportunity not only to stop this thing dead in its tracks, but make support for it legally actionable at the federal and State level.

Here's how:
The governors of the Several States have a lot of unused power, commonly set forth in their respective state's constitution is the power to declare a state of invasion. If two or more States were to declare such a state (with illegal immigrants being the invading force) then support for an amnesty (or even relaxed/unenforced immigration) is giving legal aid and comfort to the enemies of the Several States.

This is important because the Constitution clearly defines Treason as follows: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” — and Treason is one of the things that the privilege from arrest given congressmen in Art I, Sec 6 does not cover.

Indeed, after declaring such a state of invasion the Constitution requires the federal government to provide help to the states in Art 4, Sec 4, and to withhold help would be treason. Furthermore, a Supreme Court ruling stating the actions of the Governors actions as legitimate would be, again, treason.

Now is the time to make the Federal Government choke on its own actions. Let us force them into a political no-win scenario while they think they have us between a wall and a sword.

[EternalVigilance]

Absolutely.

[OneWingedShark]

Thought you guys might be interested, with the talk about Constitutionality.

[KittenClaws]

Thanks for the ping!

[apocalypto]

bump

[SunkenCiv]

• ---

  I, for one, am for immigration reform. … That being said, I’m worried that the bill before us won’t pass.... [Rand Paul: I hate to say it, but the immigration bill is a little bit like ObamaCare right now ]

• ---

  [Paul open to voting for Senate immigration bill]

• ---

  [Rand Paul: I'm Open to Voting for Immigration Bill]

• ---

  Latinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers... [Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform]

  ---

• ...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said. [Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance]

• ---

  One day after announcing on his radio show that he is "truly considering" running in 2014 for the U.S. Senate seat now held by New Jersey's Frank Lautenberg, Rivera amped up his message today in a television interview and a column on the Fox News Latino website... a moderate Republican who is fiscally conservative but also supports gay marriage and Roe v. Wade... [Geraldo Rivera declares himself a 'moderate Republican' as he eyes U.S. Senate run]

  ---

[boxlunch]

What is the individual citizen's relationship with our government? Are the statements in the Constitution similar to a binding contract or covenant with duties and responsibilities that must be fulfilled? What are the consequences if they are not? In other words, when is the contract or a section of the contract rendered void? (I'm not a lawyer or a Constitutional expert by any means, I'm just trying to learn.)

And I'm not looking for the pat “Tree of liberty...”quotes. Just wondering when it is that part of a contract has been breached, then is the offended party free to go on and fulfill that requirement in some other way? Even if the Supreme court says, no, you can't do that... when can the state legislatures/governor just ignore and task the State militias to begin securing the border because the Federal government has broken their side of the contract?

---

We’re dealing with a matter that is fundamental and indispensible. When the oath is sworn, as Article Six requires of all officers of government in this country, in every branch, at every level, the core of that oath involves the securing of the lives, the liberty, the property of every individual, and the sovereignty, security, borders, and independence of the whole people. It’s a shared duty. It’s why we have a Union, and why we have a Constitution. It is the raison d’etre of this free republic, and the reason for the existence of each and every office within it.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men...”

— The Declaration of Independence

The Constitution gives special duties in this regard to the President of the United States, and as you rightfully pointed out, the state constitutions give special responsibilities to the Governors.

But, fundamentally, the right and duty of self-protection and self-preservation is, as Samuel Adams and the Committees of Correspondence pointed out, the first law of nature.

[EternalVigilance]

“The basis of our political system is the right of the people to make and to alter their Constitution of government. But the Constitution which at any times exists, ’til changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole People, is sacredly obligatory upon all.”

— George Washington

That’s not pat, by the way. It seems to go straight to the heart of your question.

Or at least part of it.

But, when we’re talking about self-preservation, you can’t wait around forever for others to do their duty. At some point, if you do not act on your own behalf, you are dead.

[OneWingedShark]

The other part is laid out in the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Or, as a picture paints a thousand words, this:

[central_va]

Historically the only thing that gets the undivided attention of FedGov™ is shelling one of their forts and for the states to start forming their own infantry regiments.

[OneWingedShark]

Historically the only thing that gets the undivided attention of FedGov™ is shelling one of their forts and for the states to start forming their own infantry regiments.

I want the infantry regiments formed up beforehand... and the shelling should be something a little more... purge-worthy.
Like, say, the IRS or NSA headquarters. (The latter really did an act of war against the Citizens of the Several States, the former merely violated all public trust.)

[OneWingedShark]

Historically the only thing that gets the undivided attention of FedGov™ is shelling one of their forts and for the states to start forming their own infantry regiments.

I also forgot to add, that is also what would make this plan so sweet: it would be slipping something under their noses (like they to us did w/ obamacare) — I do like the idea of turning things around on them.

[central_va]

I would gladly double may state tax bill if we could form our own independent Army under the command of the Governor.

[OneWingedShark]

I would gladly double may state tax bill if we could form our own independent Army under the command of the Governor.

Er, you can:

VA Constitution
Art 1, Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power.
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Art 5, Section 7. Executive and administrative powers.
The Governor shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.
The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the Commonwealth and shall have power to embody such forces to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, and enforce the execution of the laws.
The Governor shall conduct, either in person or in such manner as shall be prescribed by law, all intercourse with other and foreign states.
The Governor shall have power to fill vacancies in all offices of the Commonwealth for the filling of which the Constitution and laws make no other provision. If such office be one filled by the election of the people, the appointee shall hold office until the next general election, and thereafter until his successor qualifies, according to law. The General Assembly shall, if it is in session, fill vacancies in all offices which are filled by election by that body.
Gubernatorial appointments to fill vacancies in offices which are filled by election by the General Assembly or by appointment by the Governor which is subject to confirmation by the Senate or the General Assembly, made during the recess of the General Assembly, shall expire at the end of thirty days after the commencement of the next session of the General Assembly.

[central_va]

I want to be in an VA State Militia artillery unit within range of DC.

[rdcbn]

The Soap box, the Ballot box ....

We are running out of boxes

[Whenifhow]

Video on the page
Courage: 70 House Republicans to push back against immigration bill
http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/06/13/courage-70-house-republicans-to-push-back-against-immigration-bill/
Especially listen at 2:30 - 4:50
Lawsuit in Texas - prevent granting amnesty through proclamation. President violating separation of powers.

3:40 minutes

Bachmann, Gohmert, & Steve King Appeal Directly To Glenn Beck And Audience: ‘We’re Losing Badly...’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF72shKAP5A

[JCBreckenridge]

That’s the key. The states *aren’t* enforcing the federal law. The law simply requires that the states turn these people over to the federal government.

The states can’t deport them out of the country, but they *can* send them out of state.

[txrangerette]

Send them to Washington, DC.

Maryland.

Va.

Anywhere in the DC metro area.

All tied to the federal government.

After declaring that they are an invasion of their state.

[DrewsMum]

Texas and the governor loves illegal immigration. Don’t expect any help there.

[thesearethetimes...]

BookMark