The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution

Tenth Amendment Center ^ | 07-18-09 | Tenth Amendment Center

[sovereignty2]

A line was drawn in the sand last week - a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.

Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal Power, the Tennessee State Senate approved Senate Bill 1610, the Tennesse Firearms Freedom Act, by a vote of 22-7. It previously passed the House by a vote of 87-1.

The law states that “federal laws and regulations do not apply to personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee and remains in Tennessee. The limitation on federal law and regulation stated in this bill applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured using basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported into this state.”

At the time of passage through the TN House and Senate, Judiciary Chairman Mae Beavers had this to say-

“Be it the federal government mandating changes in order for states to receive federal funds or the federal government telling us how to regulate commerce contained completely within this state – enough is enough. Our founders fought too hard to ensure states’ sovereignty and I am sick and tired of activist federal officials and judges sticking their noses where they don’t belong.”

The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.

[theFIRMbss]

>Screw the feds. They have not jurisdiction

Like my father before me I’m a working man Like my brother above me I took a rebel stand He was just eighteen, proud and brave But a Yankee laid him in his grave I swear by the mud below my feet You can’t raise a Cain back up When he’s in defeat The night they drove old Dixie down All the bells were ringing The night they drove old Dixie down All the bells were ringing...

[Talisker]

It would be the Federal law, that would be tested in Federal Court, and the State Law would be used as evidence against the Constitutional legality of the Federal law.

Agreed, agreed, agreed. I am not arguing with your basic concept, and I did say that the actual legal process could take a number of forms - civil, litigant; criminal, defendant.

BUT, my point is that there is adminsitrative and common law jurisdictions, and they are different. A federal administrative State is not a constitutionally created original state. And the Feds WILL presume federal administrative jusridiction, because with it, they win (for example, ATF is a federal agency, i.e. operating under federal administrative law).

It's jurisdicational warfare, and federal courts simply DO NOT acknowledge anything outside of administrative jurisdiction. In fact, they call any attempt at an argument outside of that jurisdiction "frivolous" (their term, not mine).

So, if there is a way to force a federal court to sit in their common law capacity, they ain't saying what it is. In fact, I have never heard of a court-acknowledged refutation to their presumption of administrative jurisdiction - ever.

It's a judiciary thing - the judges simply refuse to sit under common law. And nothing I know of can force them to, unless Congress passes a law that they do so. But why would they, since their power comes from imposing the presumption of federal administrative jurisidiction?

[Dayman]

I fully support the 10th and detest all gun laws that don’t deal with teh actual hurting of people. There should be no NICS checks, bans, age limits, FFL licensing, abolish the NFA, etc., but I have to point out one problem with this law....

TN state law requires all firearm sales from FFL dealers go through their state system called TICS. This law does not provide an exemption to the state law mandating buyers undergo a background check through the TICS system. So, due to an (intentional???) omission, the law is almost purely symbolic.

The challenge will come from manufacturers who wish to sell them directly to non-FFL holders without going through the TICS system.

(I owned a storefront gun shop for 2.5 years in East TN, and 2 years in NH.)

[Still Thinking]

The Tennessee General Assembly lacks the Constitutional authority to limit the power and authority of federal government in this way...

Well, first of all the feral government is the result of a compact by pre-existing states so I can't see why they would lack the power. But that's beside the point. In this case, they're not "limiting the power and authority of the federal government" so much as insisting that the limits already built in to the Constitution be honored, for the first time in decades. The limit is already there. To gripe at these guys for having the temerity to notice is to shoot the messenger.

[papasmurf]

Well, I think, and I’m by no means an Attorney or scholar, that the ATF is setup to be a taxing authority. That being the case the Commerce clause comes into play, which has been widely abused. Specifically, I remember the United States v. Lopez, and Rehnquist slapped them down with (IIRC) a precisely worded defeat.

[rightwingjew]

In such a case, who would fight against the state of Tenn.?