Posted on 02/07/2010 6:15:41 AM PST by wolfcreek
“The initial revolt of the Southern States was because of unfair taxation of cotton and other items of commerce, creating an unfair balance of economics between the Rich north and the impoverished south.”
There you go!
That nails it down very well.
Of course it does. The laws have to be Constitutional.
Are you saying the Supreme Court absolutely will never, ever find that the federal government no matter what it enacts has overreached?
On the contrary, it has in the past and will again in the future.
The States created the Federal government and not the other way around period end of story!
EVERYTHING is a matter of political will.
If enough people want something badly enough, they will make it happen.
SCR-1615 ...
Soon to be approved in a State Capitol near you.
The ten Federal Regions were first established by President Nixon in 1972 with Executive Order 11647 which was reimplemented by President Carter (Executive Order 12314) and revoked by Reagan in 1983 with Executive Order 12407. Now Obama is re-establishing them formally from the highest level.
These ten federal regions are not new under Obama. They originally were for the Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, HEW, HUD, Transportation, Energy, EPA, GSA, FEMA, SBA, OPM, CSA, and Corps of Engineers (see the above link for Carter's order). Most of those agencies still use those regions for internal organization -- for going on forty years now (since Nixon started them in 1972)
Which isn't much. This is as worthless as all your other posts are.
So says the most irrelevant contributor on FR.
LOL!
Sorry, Pee Wee, try again.
That was last year and it died without any action. I believe they would have to resubmit it for the upcoming legislative session in order for them to dither some more. Still, our legislature won’t oppose the state Supreme Court when they overstep their bounds and set minimum spending for schools so I don’t see them standing up to the federal government. Assuming that they really understand what they’re voting on.
Second most irrelevant, now that you're here.
LMAO! You really are Pee Wee Herman.
“I know you are, but what am I.”
And you fall for it every time.
Thanks. Best laugh I’ve had in a while.
> If memory serves the idea that a state could nullify a > federal law died in 1832. In 1992, in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), for only the second time in 55 years, the Supreme Court invalidated a portion of a federal law for violating the Tenth Amendment. The case challenged a portion of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985. The Court re-affirmed that Congress cannot directly compel states to enforce federal regulations. In 1997, the Court again ruled that the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act violated the Tenth Amendment in Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997). The act required state and local law enforcement officials to conduct background checks on persons attempting to purchase handguns. Since the act forced participation of the States executive in the actual administration of a federal program, it was unconstitutional. |
You act as if that's something new rather than precedent going back over 150 years. In Prigg v Pennsylvania in 1842 the Supreme Court ruled that states could not be compelled to enforce federal fugitive slave laws. That's been upheld in a number of cases since then.
And I'll point out that New York v U.S. was a Supreme Court case. It was the court which struck down the enforcement of the regulation and not a case of a state nullifying the law and saying on their own that they did not have to abide by it.
Nothing worthwhile to add, as always. You are nothing if not predictable.
> That was last year and it died without any action.
It’s in committee right now as I understand it.
With the mood of the electorate, I don’t think it die in 2010 ...
LOL! No problem, Pee Wee. My work here is done. And it was so easy.
LOL!
You are aware it’s a non-binding resolution right?
Another infamous ‘None-Sense’ sighting. Licking Federal boot and all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.