Posted on 02/05/2013 6:53:37 PM PST by 11th_VA
You may have heard the word “nullification” bandied about recently. It’s basically a fancy word for ignoring a law.
Juries sometimes do it, if they think enforcement of a law will result in an injustice. Merriam-Webster defines nullification as “the action of a state impeding or attempting to prevent the operation and enforcement within its territory of a law of the United States.”
And now, increasing numbers of sheriffs and others across the country are publicly saying they will engage in nullification if faced by federal gun or health care laws they find unconstitutional.
Ignoring laws is rarely a good thing. We’d say never — but we’re reminded of Rosa Parks’ and other civil rights icons’ peaceful defiance of the immoral laws and customs of segregation.
An increasing number of folks are no less convinced that Washington is trampling on other civil rights.
Sheriffs in Idaho, Oregon and Texas have announced their intent not to go along with expected gun control laws. Other officials have said they won’t enforce the health care law. A state representative in Tennessee wants to make it a crime to enforce gun or ammunition bans in that state.
And several hundred gathered at the South Carolina capitol recently for a “Nullify Obamacare” rally. They were promised efforts by several state officials to block “federal encroachment.”
There’s a proud tradition of states’ rights in South Carolina — exemplified not that long ago by the light bulb. When federal law began phasing out production of the incandescent light bulb, South Carolina lawmakers passed “The Light Bulb Freedom of Choice Act” to allow for its production and sale within the state, which Washington can’t prevent.
But nullification has rarely seen this much favor since the Civil War, and may only gain steam if Washington continues down the path of trying to run everyone’s lives.
Washington may have no one but itself to blame for the rise of the nullification movement — particularly the Obama administration, which has set the standard for ignoring the law.
It was this administration, after all, that decided not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. Even though the “Dream Act” can’t pass Congress, Mr. Obama “enacted” it via executive order — announcing that his administration would not deport illegal aliens who came here as minors. There is no such exception in the law.
His administration also announced that marijuana crimes would not be a “priority” — again, picking and choosing which laws to enforce.
When it appeared the defense industry might have to issue layoff notices to workers because of impending “sequestration” cuts just before the November election, the Obama administration encouraged contractors to ignore the law that seemed to require the notices.
The Obama administration also tried to block enforcement of state anti-voter-fraud laws last year.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate has failed to pass a budget as required by law the past four years — and the Obama administration has announced it won’t have a federal budget ready by the statutory deadline.
We don’t endorse the ignoring of laws. But if there’s a growing sentiment of defiance toward enforcement of federal laws in the land, Washington can’t exactly throw stones.
It has perfected the art.
Thank you for posting this! Just about sums it all up for me.
The Federal Grand Jury is the 4th Branch of Government
Most of this article is going to quote other scholars, judges and legislators as I piece together a brief but thorough history of the federal grand jury for your review. But the punch line is my personal contribution to the cause:
“Investigating seditious acts of government officials can be deemed inappropriate or unavailing by the prosecutor, or the judge can dismiss the grand jurors pursuing such investigations. Consequently, corrupt government officials have few natural enemies and go about their seditious business unimpeded.”
UNITED STATES CITIZENS SITTING AS FEDERAL GRAND JURORS ARE THE FOURTH BRANCH OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.
My input into this vital fight is no more than the analysis of a few carefully used words. It only took a small sleight of pen back in 1946 to hide our power, and it won’t take more than a few words to take that power back. But a proper overview is necessary for most of you who are unfamiliar with the issue at hand. So let me provide you with some history and then we’ll see what went wrong and how to correct it.
HISTORY OF FEDERAL GRAND JURY POWER
I want to draw your attention to a law review article, CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW, Vol. 33, No. 4 1999-2000, 821, IF IT’S NOT A RUNAWAY, IT’S NOT A REAL GRAND JURY by Roger Roots, J.D.
“In addition to its traditional role of screening criminal cases for prosecution, common law grand juries had the power to exclude prosecutors from their presence at any time and to investigate public officials without governmental influence. These fundamental powers allowed grand juries to serve a vital
An honest newspaper! From their Editorial Staff. Good to know there’s apparently at least one decent paper.
Bears repeating. Especially at the "media" as they whine about states trying to dilute what Zero is trying to do to this country (and they will!). Love the part about the light bulbs. I'm going to check and see if Florida will do the same.
[[We don’t endorse the ignoring of laws]]
Not sure why not? Especially when our elected officials ARE ignoring hte laws and removing our rights? Not too long ago the federal government tried enacting a federal law (caqn’t remember what it was, but it was an assault on freedoms If I remember right) And many states took a stand and said “Nope- Not on our watch you’re not goign to do this to the peopel you SERVE!”) and htese states stood strong agaisnt hte federal law, and refused to abide by it and forced the government to back down because htere was no way for hte government to enforce the law in the states that refused to enforce it
The PEOPLE hire officials to SERVE THEM=- the officials are NOT hired/elecvted to serve themselves and noone else- When an elected official REFUSES to serve the peopel any longer, and does deals behind colsed doors i nthe middle of the night because they KNOW the peopel woudl reject the proposal- then the elected officials are NOT doign the job they were hired to do.
The peopel then have a right and responsibility to REMOVE that official from office OR to refuse to abide by the laws that violate their freedoms- NY has a PERRFECT opportunity to stand up now and REFUSE to abide by the tyranical gun laws- but I doubt they will do so- Wayne Lappierre has a PERFECT opportunity to tell the federal government “Nope=- NO MORE gun laws- You can’t even enforce3 the ones you already have, and there are THOUSANDS of laws and you have gone way too far in your restrictions- the peopel say NO MORE! but it’s doubtful wayne will do so
[[His administration also announced that marijuana crimes would not be a “priority” — again, picking and choosing which laws to enforce.]]
A perfect example of LAWLESSNESS BY OFFICIALS who are elected to enforrce laws, NOT to ignore them nor to make them without due reprsentation (Boston Tea Rebellion?)- they were hired to do a job, and they are FAILING to do their job- You or I when we fail to do our job- We get FIRED!
FALSE!
Not only ignoring laws, but breaking laws. For example federal, state, and international laws were broken during the fiasco called Fast and Furious.
5.56mm
Sums up my feelings as well ... glad to hear I’m not alone.
Now is the time to proudly fly your Gadsden Flags, ( I have the black background Gadsden too), and attend to take over your local RINO Cave-In Meetings.
Romney was the Doormat RINO Party’s ‘Last Hurrah.’
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
Well said
Remember Rosa- FUBO!
Ping, in case you missed this thread.
Nullification was first termed by Thomas Jefferson, in his Kentucky Resolution of 1798. The resolution was created in response to the unconstitutional federal Alien and Sedition Acts. These acts were a clear violation of the First Amendment. Nullification allows the states to protect the rights of citizens from federal encroachment.
( Sing to the tune Finiculee , finicula)
Last night, I tried my hand at nullification
It did me good.
I knew it would.
Tonight , I shall repeat this operation,
To stretch my ire,
to my desire.
I chomped it, stomped it
Caught it in the door.
Smashed it, crashed it, wiped it
on the floor.
And all of this I say is very simply grand,
To nullify the law
just by the power of my hand!
“Washington” has become a word that describes a living entity. “Washington did this, Washington did that.” We used to be Washington. But no more.
FALSE!
You are right, nullification is not 'ignoring' the law. Nullification is judging the law to be invalid.
hey, did ya’ll see this? it’s encouraging — looks like a Norman Rockwell for 2nd amendment (wish I could get a frame shot from it, need to learn how):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2985627/posts
via youtube is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTdhVxva5KU
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.