Is the Federal Government Supreme and Above the States?

Sierra Times ^ | Robert Greenslade

[Sir Gawain]

-

[WhiskeyPapa]

Nowhere in this provision does it state the federal government is supreme and above the States. It simply states that the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof are supreme.

And both the Judiciary Act of 1789 and the Militia Act of 1792 are bars to unilateral state secession.

Walt

[TommyDale]

I guess the 10th Amendments is worthless.

[WhiskeyPapa]

If this federal judge had not been a constitutional renegade, he would have never asserted that the federal government is supreme and above the States.

Was James Madison a constitutional renegade?

"The words of the Constitution are explicit that the Constitution & laws of the U. S. shall be supreme over the Constitution and laws of the several States; supreme in their exposition and execution as well as in their authority. Without a supremacy in those respects it would be like a scabbard in the hands of a soldier without a sword in it. The imagination itself is startled at the idea of twenty four independent expounders of a rule that cannot exist, but in a meaning and operation, the same for all."

- James Madison, March, 1833

Walt

[WhiskeyPapa]

I guess the 10th Amendments is worthless.

Actually, for all intents and purposes, it is.

Walt

[eyespysomething]

10th Amendment bump to read later

[William Terrell]

In order for the federal government to be supreme and above the States, it would first have to have the constitutional power to modify or abolish the powers of the States. No such power was granted to the federal government by the Constitution. In fact, since the States created the federal government, they have the power to abolish or amend the powers of their federal government any time they wish.

The author says nothing about the 14th amendment, which, in my personal opinion, was the purpose of the war. The 14th amendment creates citizens of the US and let's them "reside" in the states, whereas, before the war, states created citizens of the states and by virtue of that were they citizens of the US.

This is why so little attention is given to the 9th and 10th amendments now. If a political power can award citizenship, it is supreme. Only now are some of the most radical changes to our form of government becoming evident.

But it's far too late.

[Iscool]

Good article...Doesn't seem to attract much attention at "Free Republic" tho...

[TommyDale]

Remember the firestorm created by Bill Clinton and his Executive Order # 13083? That butthole tried to single-handedly eliminate all states' rights and give all power to the Federal Government. I was glad when the Senate finally got enough cajones to overturn it, and pass the word to the White House that it was entirely out of line. Thanks to my friend Lauch Faircloth for taking it up in the Senate after our meeting back in 1998.

[tpaine]

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land…any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Nowhere in this provision does it state the federal government is supreme and above the States. It simply states that the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof are supreme.
_____________________________________


And both the Judiciary Act of 1789 and the Militia Act of 1792 are bars to unilateral state secession.
-Walt-



So what?
Granted, states cannot unilateraly secede.
This has nothing to do with the position that States, while bound by the basic principles of our constitutions supremacy, are still sovereign, and have ALL governmental powers not expressly delegated to the federal government; -- just as the 10th amendent specifies.

The tenth is not 'dead'. Never has been.

Only the States political 'will' is dead. They are under the control of the same political machine that runs our federal bureaucracy.

There is nothing wrong with our constitution. Everything is wrong with our political system.

[freekitty]

"In order for the federal government to be supreme and above the States, it would first have to have the constitutional power to modify or abolish the powers of the States. No such power was granted to the federal government by the Constitution. In fact, since the States created the federal government, they have the power to abolish or amend the powers of their federal government any time they wish. "

What happens, for example, Maryland going under? Isn't this an opportunity for the Fed to take over?

[gcruse]

the laws of Congress are restricted to a certain
 sphere, and when they depart from this sphere,
they are no longer supreme or binding.


Consider the following statements by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in a concurring opinion in U. S. v. Lopez (1995):

We have said that Congress may regulate not only 'Commerce…among the several states,'…but also anything that has a 'substantial effect' on such commerce. This test, if taken to its logical extreme, would give Congress a 'police power' over all aspects of American life.

Under our jurisprudence, if Congress passed an omnibus 'substantially affects interstate commerce' statute, purporting to regulate every aspect of human existence, the Act apparently would be constitutional.

Justice Thomas went on to state that under the substantially affects interstate commerce test adopted by the Court, "[c]ongress can regulate whole categories of activities that are not themselves either 'interstate or commerce.'" _______________________

[detsaoT]

I love this article, and how clearly it describes the intended relationship between the many States and the United States.

The article neglects to mention that the States have ceded much of their responsibility to the Federal Government, thorough many means. Many States have laws on the books which cede additional powers to the Feds (this is how the FBI has jurisdicition in Virginia, for example). The States have also given up their sovereignty by holding out their hands begging for Federal dollars.

After over 100 years of having implied (not de facto) supremacy, the Feds would not take too kindly to the States attempting to reclaim what was once, and is rightfully theirs. If the States ever wake up to what they've lost, another Civil War is inevitable...

:( ttt

[detsaoT]

The author says nothing about the 14th amendment, which, in my personal opinion, was the purpose of the war. The 14th amendment creates citizens of the US and let's them "reside" in the states, whereas, before the war, states created citizens of the states and by virtue of that were they citizens of the US.

Agreed. Unfortunately, the 14th Amendment almost completely transformed us from a Federal Republic into a centralist, totalitarian democracy, controlled by whomever happens to be in power on the Potomac.

The only thing left to transform us completely into a mindless dictatorship of the majority is the persistance of the Electoral College.

It's quite sad to think about the freedoms we have lost.

:) ttt

[Van Jenerette]

For my Government Class reading...Thanks!

[William Terrell]

I don't think the fed needs an opportunity. The states are already de jure abolished. Some have even repealed the article of their constitutions that defines the borders of their state. I think the fed merely has to judge the time is ripe to effect the true submission of the states and come out from under cover. The quality of public education is laying the ground work.

[gcruse]

All it will take it is the 'substanatially effects interstate commerce clause.' No biggie.

[Ronly Bonly Jones]

Is the Federal Government Supreme and Above the States? >> Yes. See the case of Union v. Confederacy, 1 U.S. 1 (Appomatox Court House, VA, 1865) The Court of History found for the plaintiff.

[Ronly Bonly Jones]

Underline </u> off. Ooopsie.