Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The legal fiction that states can nullify US law persist in Texas
Austin American Statesman ^ | 2.6.2010 | Sanford Levinson

Posted on 02/07/2010 6:15:41 AM PST by wolfcreek

An unexpected feature of this year's gubernatorial race is the revival of certain political notions identified with early American history. Republican candidate Debra Medina in particular has made nullification a major aspect of her campaign, both in her two debates with U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Gov. Rick Perry and on her Web site, which includes, under the label "Restore Sovereignty," the message that the U.S. Constitution "divides power between the federal and state governments and ultimately reserves final authority for the people themselves. Texas must stop the over reaching federal government and nullify federal mandates in agriculture, energy, education, healthcare, industry, and any other areas D.C. is not granted authority by the Constitution."

She does not specify the mechanism by which nullification would take place, but, obviously, she appears to believe that the legal authority to nullify is unquestionable, making it only a question of political will.

(Excerpt) Read more at statesman.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; US: South Carolina; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; constitution; liberalidiots; media; mediabias; medina; neoconfederate; notbreakingnews; nullification; paulbots; secession; sovereignty; statesrights; teapartyrebellion; tenthamendment; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 821-830 next last
To: BobL
No, we cannot secede. The Supreme Court ruled on it and said it was unconstitutional.

And if we did indeed secede the Supreme Court wouldn't mean jack sh!t now would it.

81 posted on 02/07/2010 7:25:48 AM PST by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
You are assuming that all federal laws are de facto supreme over the constitutional rights reserved by the states.

What part of "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding" is unclear?

Even today there are many laws that states are not actually required to follow. It’s just that if they don’t, the feds refuse to send the states money. So the states follow the federal laws simply so they don’t lose federal money. That is quite different than being required to follow the federal law by law.

And you blame the federal government for that?

82 posted on 02/07/2010 7:26:45 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: STONEWALLS

His support of the Trans Texas Corridor with foreign ownership is a big negative in that regard.


83 posted on 02/07/2010 7:26:53 AM PST by tbw2 (Freeper sci-fi - "Humanity's Edge" - on amazon.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TheZMan

“Interesting. So a SCOTUS ruling is going to matter when the people of this state decide to leave the union?”

That’s why I get such a kick out of it. People don’t seem to realize that overreach and unwillingness to protect the Constitution, by SCOTUS, is EXACTLY why we’re getting closer to leaving.

It’s like being abducted getting yourself loose in the bedroom, and instead of going out the window, you go into the living room and ask your abductor if it’s ok to leave - and if he says no, you ask him to tie you up again. Go figure.


84 posted on 02/07/2010 7:27:17 AM PST by BobL (When Democrats start to love this country more than they hate Republicans, good things might happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

His elloqution is a bit hard to get through and sometimes to follow. However, his notions were the Federal government would not do any of these oppressive things some would argue they would do because, and primarily because, the power is with the people the states, not the other way around.

IMO, the greatest tragedy of the War Between the States is the Confederacy lost. Yeah, it was over slavery but the over riding issue was whether the Federal government could over power states rights in an area NOT proscribed to them by the constitution. In fact, the constitution legislated for slavery in its count of the population. Now then, would it have gone away in time anyway, most likely yes and probably before 1900, on its own due to industrialization or by constitution amendment as the country was growning especially in the non slave holding states.

Vince


85 posted on 02/07/2010 7:27:19 AM PST by Mouton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Refuse the money and you don’t have to abide by the strings tied to the money.


86 posted on 02/07/2010 7:27:32 AM PST by tbw2 (Freeper sci-fi - "Humanity's Edge" - on amazon.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cacique
I think you need to reread the Constitution. The powers described in Article I are given by the people to the Federal Government, not the other way around. Those powers are limited and enumerated, with those powers not so delegated reserved to the states or to the people.

Secession is not a good idea (been there, done that, failed miserably), but what does and will work is a re-establishment of the proper relationship between the citizens of our Republic and the Federal Government, and between the states and that government.

As a practical matter, this means that even while the Federal government has supremacy in enumerated functions for each of its branches, states through their elected representatives may refuse to acknowledge powers claimed by the Federal government that are forbidden by the Constitution or on which the Constitution is silent. The Supreme Court rules in such interstitial areas as to where the proper boundaries of Federal power lie.

87 posted on 02/07/2010 7:27:44 AM PST by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cacique

“Texans have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.” Texas Constitution - Article 1- Section 2

“Whenever any form of government is destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government in such form as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness.” Declaration of Independence, 1776


88 posted on 02/07/2010 7:28:09 AM PST by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Solitar
Yes you can, constitutionally and legally — if you use honest Constitutional lawyers and legislators.

You cannot nullify a law passed under the Constitution. Not legally. Not Constitutionally. If you don't like it then leave the Union. That CAN be done both Constitutionally and legally.

89 posted on 02/07/2010 7:28:15 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
Well, I tend to take the word of the victim over the word of the armed home invader.

Who the victim is would depend on which side of the issue you are on, wouldn't it?

90 posted on 02/07/2010 7:28:59 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek
Obviously you believe in the *Union mysticism*, a general affection for the so-called Union. What about states rights afforded in the Constitution?

I believe states should have all the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

91 posted on 02/07/2010 7:29:51 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
God save us from yet another Texan president.

We could do worse.
In fact - we have!

And not Perry specifically - but a Texan in general.

92 posted on 02/07/2010 7:31:52 AM PST by grobdriver (Proud Member, Party Of No! No Socialism - No Fascism - Nobama - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

You obviously ignore the Constitution and Madison’s and Jefferson’s arguments for nullification.


93 posted on 02/07/2010 7:32:07 AM PST by Solitar ("My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them." -- Barry Goldwater)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Solitar
You obviously ignore the Constitution and Madison’s and Jefferson’s arguments for nullification.

Well then by all means let us see them.

94 posted on 02/07/2010 7:33:38 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver
We could do worse. In fact - we have!

We could to much, much better. And we have.

95 posted on 02/07/2010 7:35:31 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

In post #56 I gave you a link to see those arguments for nullification — if you have the courage to read them.


96 posted on 02/07/2010 7:35:58 AM PST by Solitar ("My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them." -- Barry Goldwater)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh

If I reread the constitution I am liable to discover it’s violation each and every day in the minutest of forms. I don’t think there is an amendment in the bill of rights which is not currently being violated by either local, state or federal governments. But it’s not Washington we need to blame, far too often we have allowed minor violations to surmount to the point that we practically no longer have a constitution. We here on FR may be informed and educated. But we represent a mere less than 10% of the population, most of our fellow Americans have no clue what’s in the constitution except from a rudimentary perspective which they gained from our decrepit indoctrination system called public education.


97 posted on 02/07/2010 7:38:25 AM PST by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek

“secession”...”In real Texan’s minds, it’s NOT fiction.”

No, it is not. But I want no part of Secession. I want the whole thing back and the Commie Bast__ds out and tried for treason.

I know Texas has neighbors who feel the same way.

It is TIME to DownSize DC!

Eliminate entire Departments (Education, EPA, etc)

IT IS TIME!


98 posted on 02/07/2010 7:40:55 AM PST by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfcreek; stylecouncilor; windcliff; firep0w3r; I Drive Too Fast; Allegra; Alamo-Girl; ...

Ooooh, I like this thread!


99 posted on 02/07/2010 7:41:18 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbw2
Refuse the money and you don’t have to abide by the strings tied to the money.

Hmmmmm... And where did the money come from in the first place?

100 posted on 02/07/2010 7:44:11 AM PST by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 821-830 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson