So, the Democrats say the states have a right to defy the federal government. Is this a bad thing?

Jan 8, 2019 | by Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

The democrats say the states have a right to defy the federal government when it comes to NOT enforcing immigration laws they don't like.

Does this mean the more conservative states have a right to defy the federal government in regards to enforcing laws they don't like? 'Legalized' abortion on demand or same-sex marriage, for example. How about gun control laws?

Is there any federal law that states MUST enforce even if they don't like it?

Can cities and states pass sanctuary one man, one woman marriage laws? Sanctuary pro-life laws? Sanctuary gun rights laws? Sanctuary free religion laws? Sanctuary don't have to bake the homosexual cake law, etc.

This could be a good thing. Especially when the states believe the federal government has overstepped its constitutional bounds or limits and or infringed on states or individual rights.

[Brian Griffin]

“Sanctuary don’t have to bake the homosexual cake law, etc.”

Western states were required to have perfect religious tolerance as a condition of statehood.

Perfect means providing no motivation to walk to a courthouse door.

[Spok]

The small town of Republic Washington declared itself to be a sanctuary for the Second Amendment.

[Bull Snipe]

In the late 1850s, Democrats were very upset with Northern States for not enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act. They begged the Buchanan Administration to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, at the point of U.S. Army bayonets, if need be.
Now they are saying that States can pick and choose which Federal Laws they will obey?

[Reily]

In regard to immigration law state & cities have been practicing nullification for some time.

[Brian Griffin]

“states or individual rights”

States have powers.

Individuals have rights.

[Reno89519]

Defy at their peril, I say. Our states should strictly adhere to the constitution and federal laws. If they don't like them, they have legislative recourse, even can seek to amend the constitution.

We have a mess now because states like California ignore our constitution and laws--the 2nd amendment as one example means something quite different when I, a US citizen, drive five miles from my home in Nevada to California. Not that many years ago Arizona lost a series of lawsuits when they tried to establish and enforce a series of laws to limit immigration. Now, though, we have states, again California is a great example, that openly defy federal law regarding immigration.

It is time that we get a serious reset and apply our federal laws and constitution equally across the US, allowing no state to openly defy or infringe upon them and, by extension, all of us citizens.

[M Kehoe]

Hi guy.

The Ninth and Tenth amendments are as good as the Second amendment, only if enforced by the people.

5.56mm

[aimhigh]

The Dems hate this country so much, they will eventually call this nation “The States”.

[MuttTheHoople]

Democrats? States Rights? Where have we heard that before?

[ImpBill]

All this division of Americans by political ideology carried forward to what is fast appearing the final conclusion will be, imho, the division of America into Regional Republics.

Being at an advanced age I might not see this happen, but it sure seems to be headed in that direction.

[omega4412]

The doctrine of “NULLIFICATION.”

Isn't it fun to watch Jerry Brown and Gavin Newson channel John Calhoun?

[Nifster]

It was a bad thing in 1860

[cowboyusa]

It’s already happened on the state government level. CA,CT,HI, IL,MA,MD,MJ,NY,OR,RI,VA,VT and WA governments make up what I call, NWO America. They have declared war on everything that the US has stood for, and side with the UN and EU.

[Brian Griffin]

“Is there any federal law that states MUST enforce even if they don’t like it?”

Amendment XIV “equal protection” items.

“Section 5.

“The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

There’s also the necessary and proper clause of Article I, Section 8. States might have to fork over income tax data.

[cowboyusa]

There is way more intrastate division than during the 1st Civil War. I'm afraid it will be more like Missouri during the 1st Civil War.

[Fledermaus]

Or ban abortion. That will drive the Dems mad.

[Lurkinanloomin]

I’m just waiting for the first locality to announce a Second Amendment sanctuary where nfa ‘34 AND gca ‘68 do not apply.
I’m there.

[MeganC]

I like how you think!!!

[yldstrk]

no

[American Infidel]

Let's see this put to the test by states refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses. Watch how fast a federal judge issues a ruling mandating that the state has no right to do so despite what the 10th amendment says. (Yes, I know this was adjudicated on a very tenuous 14th amendment rationale but you get the point).

Better yet; a state that is a 'sanctuary state' from federal taxation. Since the dems have established that states get to pick and choose which federal laws we need to obey, I don't see why this should be a problem.