Mr. Woods mentions de facto state nullificaton of the Big Brother REAL ID Act. About 25 states have refused to adhere to that federal mandate.
States have nullified federal gun laws: “analysis shows 14 such bills were passed by legislators in 11 states, mainly in Western states, along with Kansas, Tennessee and Alaska. Of those, 11 were signed into law, though one was later struck down in court. In Montana, Missouri and Oklahoma, three others were vetoed.
Discontent with Washington, US states look to nullify federal laws
02/10/2015
Reuters/Mark Leffingwell
State legislatures in the US are considering more than 200 bills – from gun rights to marijuana accessibility – that would nullify or work around various federal laws and regulations crafted in Washington, according to a states’ rights advocacy group.
The Tenth Amendment Center told The Hill the 200-plus pieces of current legislation seeking to challenge or wrest control from the federal government mark a climate of both suspicion and empowerment. The center tracks and supports states’ rights initiatives across the country.
“People are becoming more and more concerned about the overreach of the federal government,” said the group’s spokesman, Mike Maharrey. “They feel the federal government is trying to do too much, it’s too big and it’s getting more and more in debt.”
While federal law ultimately supersedes state law – if enforcement power is exercised – the Tenth Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights, says that the federal government is limited to powers granted in the US Constitution.
For instance, a bill that would “block any future federal bans on firearms or magazines” passed the Montana state House on Monday. Montana’s bill is one of eleven nationwide, according to the center, that aim to counter federal gun control measures.
Twelve states are seeking to challenge federal surveillance authority vested in the likes of the National Security Agency, revealed in June 2013 to be operating a global spying regime to advance American domestic and foreign policy goals.
In another 12 states, bills have been introduced to legalize some form of marijuana, whether it be medical, recreational, or both.
Both the New Jersey state Assembly and Senate have passed a measure to halt the state’s participation in the Pentagon’s 1033 program, which supplies surplus military weaponry to local law enforcement agencies. Gov. Chris Christie has yet to sign the bill into law.
The 1033 program and police militarization overall have received heightened scrutiny – especially after the civil unrest in Ferguson, Mo. last year, when, after a fatal police shooting of an unarmed teenager, the angered community was besieged by local police driving armored vehicles and tossing tear gas into protesting crowds.
As RT has reported, New Hampshire is one of five other states seeking laws to curb its participation in federal combat-gear programs.
Seven states have introduced measures that would mean opting out of the federal government’s purported authority to indefinitely detain a person within the US, a power that was granted under the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force. The NDAA provision was signed by President Barack Obama in early 2012 amid the Occupy movement in the US.
Three states – California, Michigan, and Virginia – have passed some form of an anti-indefinite detention law.
In recent years, the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, has been the favorite federal law that states have tried to redress.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 21 states have passed laws and measures that challenge or attempt to opt out of the health reform law. Since the law’s passage in 2010, at least 47 of 50 state legislatures have considered bills to “limit, alter, or oppose selected state or federal actions” related to the federal health law’s passage, according to the NCSL.
More on REAL ID and another onslaught in 2016 by the federal police state. It should be noted the REAL ID Act and the Patriot Act were both signed into law by Mr. Bush Jr. The irony is that if Bush Jr. had been a Democrat, Republicans in Congress would have resisted these unconstitutional acts and not rubber stamped them.
The ability to travel in the United States is about to become more restrictive as the TSA announces it will soon be enforcing new identification standards in American airports.
Beginning in 2016, passengers attempting to pass through a federal TSA checkpoint will be subject to the requirements of the REAL ID Act. To that end, the TSA will put higher scrutiny on travelers’ identities, and will only accept a federal passport or a “REAL-ID” card, which is issued by the states to meet federal requirements. Passengers will not be allowed to fly through an American airport without submitting to the advanced federal specifications.
Both federal passports and REAL-ID cards require a number of unique personal identifiers to be stored together in government databases, including his or her full name, date of birth, Social Security Number, scanned signature, and other identifiers. Both cards require biometric data: a front-facing digital photograph of the passenger’s face, which is ultimately used with a facial recognition database.
“It is a choice,” flippantly explained David Fierro, the Public Information Officer for the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles. “If you use a passport when you’re traveling you don’t have any problems. If you use your driver’s license as identification, you’ll need to either apply for the Real ID card or get a passport.”
ORIGIN OF ‘REAL ID’
The enhanced security measures stem from the passage of the REAL ID Act of 2005, a U.S. law enacted by President Bush that states that a Federal agency may not accept state-issued identification cards without complying with a number of enhanced standards of the REAL ID Act.
The states were given a number of years to comply, and many moved to pass their own laws to meet the benchmarks of the REAL ID Act. Due to some sluggish response, DHS extended the compliance deadline several times.
Unfortunately, most states were all too willing to bend to the requirements of the federal government in order to obtain “state certifications” of compliance. To signify their compliance with the federal standards, many states are now issuing identity cards emblazoned with gold stars in the corner.
According to the Department of Homeland Security, only Arizona, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, and American Samoa have not met REAL ID standards as of January 2015. By DHS estimates, 70%-80% of all U.S. drivers are already carrying around REAL ID cards or live in states that have received extensions for compliance.
Some states have even gone as far as to require the applicant to present birth certificates, W-2 tax forms, bank statements, and/or pay stubs to verify one’s identity before handing out the new REAL-ID cards. Some cards have RFID chips embedded in them.
Among the 39 benchmarks of the REAL ID Act, state ID cards have to be scannable with a bar code reader, and the states are required to share access to an electronic database with all other states.
Once DHS begins enforcing the REAL ID standards, Americans without a compliant state ID will be effectively prohibited from flying at a commercial airport. Passengers would need to obtain passports even to fly on planes that never leave the United States.
THE ILLUSION OF SECURITY
The REAL ID Act was ostensibly sold as a security enhancement to protect the country against terrorism and illegal immigration. It received overwhelming support from both Republicans and Democrats, passing 388-43 in the House and 99-1 in the Senate.
However, a few rose in opposition to REAL ID, including Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), who was perhaps its most outspoken critic. Dr. Paul, a former presidential candidate, called REAL ID a “Trojan horse” which “transform[s] state drivers licenses into de facto national ID cards.” In an impassioned speech on the House floor on February 9, 2005, Paul laid out a number of specific objections to H.R. 418:
The REAL ID Act establishes a national ID card by mandating that states include certain minimum identification standards on driver’s licenses. It contains no limits on the government’s power to impose additional standards. Indeed, it gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unilaterally add requirements as he sees fit.
Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. (AP Photo / Mary Ann Chastain)
Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas. (AP Photo / Mary Ann Chastain)
Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens. The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist. It is absurd to call this voluntary.
Republican Party talking points on this bill, which claim that this is not a national ID card, nevertheless endorse the idea that “the federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification such as driver’s licenses.” So they admit that they want a national ID but at the same time pretend that this is not a national ID.
This bill establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical and possibly other characteristics. What is even more disturbing is that, by mandating that states participate in the “Drivers License Agreement,” this bill creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that will be shared with Canada and Mexico!
This bill could have a chilling effect on the exercise of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. It re-defines “terrorism” in broad new terms that could well include members of firearms rights and anti-abortion groups, or other such groups as determined by whoever is in power at the time. There are no prohibitions against including such information in the database as information about a person’s exercise of First Amendment rights or about a person’s appearance on a registry of firearms owners.
REAL ID cards streamline the process for the centralization and federalization of our private biometric data, while offering very little true benefit. In the words of Congressman Ron Paul, the program “offers us a false sense of greater security at the cost of taking a gigantic step toward making America a police state.”
Its difficult to argue otherwise when passports may soon be necessary to travel domestically.