Posted on 12/27/2009 5:57:02 AM PST by free1977free
As previously reported, the Republican Senate caucus and at least ten attorneys general are preparing political, procedural, and legal challenges to the health-care reform legislation proposed by President Barack Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-8), and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). But freedom activists are trying to encourage State legislatures in as many States as possible to present another challenge: nullification.
Nullification is any action taken by a particular government that makes the laws passed and enacted by a higher-level government null and void within the lower-level government's jurisdiction, or at least causes enforcement of the higher-level law to be ineffective. The relevant context is a State action to nullify a federal law.
The authority that makes nullification possible is the US Constitution's Tenth Amendment, which reads:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The "delegated powers" are listed in Article 1, Section 8. The key power that federal authorities cite in saying that their proposed health-care reform is constitutionally authorized is clause 3, which reads:
The Congress shall have power...to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
This "interstate commerce clause" has been the source of expansion of federal power since the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, according to FreeRepublic.com.
Nullification has a long and rich history, beginning in 1798 with resolutions in Virginia and Kentucky passed to protest the original Alien and Sedition Acts, according to the Tenth Amendment Center. Arguably, States have taken effective nullification action as recently as this decade, when multiple States passed their own legislation expressly forbidding their respective Divisions of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to upgrade drivers' licenses in accordance with the REAL-ID Act of 2005. In response, the Obama administration recently announced that it would quietly drop the Act. In addition, thirteen States have passed legislation allowing State residents to use marijuana (Cannabis sativa) for medicinal purposes. (Tetrahydrocannabinol, the active ingredient in marijuana, is a powerful antiemetic that, some say, can greatly alleviate the nausea that plagues patients who undergo chemotherapy in the treatment of cancer.)
This year, the States of Montana and Tennessee have passed laws stating that firearms manufactured within their borders, for sale to State residents, are not subject to regulation by federal authorities. No binding court precedent exists to resolve the issue.
Nullification has never resulted in armed conflict, though several pre-War-Between-the-States nullification initiatives came close. (Technically, the War Between the States began with secession, not nullification.) Usually, one side or the other has backed down. In the REAL-ID case, perhaps federal authorities backed down for one reason only: a change in administration, to one that probably regards such stringent identification procedures as discriminatory against the most likely perceived targets, which are Arab citizens and lawful residents.
However, the backdown in the REAL-ID case has emboldened libertarian activists who see this as a precedent for effective nullification action against federal health-care reform, if any health-care form bill actually becomes law.
In June of this year, the Arizona Senate gave its approval to HCR 2014, a concurrent resolution to amend the State constitution to prohibit the enforcement of any law that requires individuals to purchase health-care insurance, or that forbids them to buy such insurance directly rather than through any federal exchange. That proposed amendment will appear on the ballot in November of 2010. At that time, five other States were considering similar measures.
More recently, according to the Tenth Amendment Center, Missouri is now considering similar legislation. RedState.com expects at least twenty States to consider nullification legislation in 2010. In fact, Arizona is the only State that has placed nullification on the ballot; it has been introduced in Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. It has failed in Indiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, and West Virginia.
Health-care reform nullification is only one issue that the Tenth Amendment Center is tracking. Many States are considering generic Tenth Amendment resolutions. (New Jersey is one.) In addition to the issues previously mentioned, the Center is also tracking movements to allow State governors to recall their National Guard contingents from overseas and to enable States to make gold or silver legal tender within their borders.
The Lectric Law Center contains multiple case-law citations bearing on the Tenth Amendment and the viability of any Tenth-Amendment-based challenge to federal power. More broadly, the Tenth Amendment Movement as such has drawn mixed reaction from commentators that might be sympathetic to the basic premise. Larry Elder suggested, in April 17, 2009, that such efforts were "a day late and a dollar short," saying that health-care reform is only one of many federal programs that, he says, activists should have challenged long before this. Matt Ross at The Conservative Hideout cited several pitfalls, such as cutoffs of highway and other funds, but suggests that States could and should cope with such cutoffs by learning how to run their States without such funds.
Other activists, like the Populist Party, insist that nullification is a necessary step toward restoring to the American federal system the relationship between federal and State governments that the framers of the Constitution originally intended, and one that conforms to the strict definition of a republic, in which governments at various levels have their own areas of responsibility, with which the higher-level governments are not supposed to interfere.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9cyGproZGQ
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamacare-sparking-10th-Amendment-rebellion-79937187.html
Here in Idaho, the state legislature is introducing a bill to have the Governor and State AG join in.
IMHO, we all MUST support this move and encourage our own states to join in this fray.
From the Governor of Georgia to his AG, "I respectfully request that you join your colleagues from Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas and Washington state in investigating the constitutionality of these special exemptions in the health care legislation and explore the availability of any legal challenges that Georgia could pursue to oppose this unconscionable scenario."
Georgia Governor requests AG review Federal Health Care Bill constitutionality
Texas Governor, Rick Perry requests Alabma Govenor to Join in Effort
Contact your own state AG and Governor's office, and state legislature and let's get this ball rolling all over this nation.
"Down with the traitors, hoorah, boys, hoorah!"
In addition, we must find vetted, constitutional candidates, who are sworn to preserve, protect, defend and bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution...who are sworn to fundamental conservatve constitutional principles as the guiding light for their candidacy and office.
When elected, they will add to the overall process of reclaiming our Republic and our Constitution.
Here are 21 Candidates from 16 states all over the country, all of whom have taken an oath to preserve the constitution and who have sworn to support twelve fundamental constitutional principles before their run for office, to Restore the Constitution, and to see those principles established and/or maintained in law if elected.
The number of citizens and candidates involved in this effort is growing rapidly. Join with us.
Join the FreeRepublic Alliance site, Restore the Constitution - The Independent American Movement for Constitutional Restoration (IAM-CR).
Not a political party, not a PAC...just everyday normal American citizens all over the country insisting on a return to fundamental constitutional principle and a restoration of the constitution as the principle focus for voting and any political discourse in our nation.
I wish we didn’t have a puke lib for a governor here in KY.
Any of the states that are possible resistors of HC takeover have Dem governors? i.e. are any Democrats actually aware of the danger and in favor of the 10th amendment?
Here in the People’s Republic of Maryland it’ll be very hard to do. Last year I requested through State Senator Allan Kittlemen to submit legislation recognizing Maryland’s State Sovereignty... no luck and I requested again this year (this morning in fact) the same request and even wrote out the language for him.
My guess is Maryland will turn it around here recognizing the Federal Governemnts right to hold the state hostage, increase our taxes more and find even more ways to suppress individual freedoms even more.
I hope they carry through with this.
Actually, it time for a movement to have a constitutional convention. I have, in the past, thought that it would be a dangerous move but now I see it as a move that needs to be taken to get our government under control and the benefits out weight the risks, not to say that it isn’t risky.
We all despise the way liberty is attacked by liberals using the ‘death by a thousand cuts’ method but it may be the only way to undermine the Obama doctrines.
Obama is the new Damien Thorn (Omen III).
Excellent and informative post. Thank you.
Maryland General Assembly is totally dominated by Dems with ratios of 3-1 and 2-1 in the House of Delegates and Senate, respectively. The Peoples Republic of Maryland indeed.
2008 if I'm not mistaken.
BTTT
Tennessee has a dem governor who is actually a businessman. I have only heard him make one statement against HCR, but he may be working behind the scenes. I know the republican house and senate passed several 10th amendment statements, and when I contacted my state senator he stated that it “might take a court battle to remind them (the feds) that the 10th is still in effect.”
And you have Montgomery County. Which is like San Francisco east, or liberal Mecca of the east.
When I am in that neck of the woods, I feel like an undercover infiltrator. Like, will they see through my disguise and and arrest me?
LOL. I feel the same way whenever I’m passing through Montgomery or Prince Georges counties, both bastions of liberal Democrats.
I think this nullification shows real promise for America. I dont expect my state of Iowa to do much to support it, but I certainly will support it myself.
If any of this monstrosity makes it to court you just need enough people to stand against the law and in favor of the plaintiff. When enough cases have been heard with failure to convict (IE refused to pay penalty or buy health care) the law will be labeled unenforceable.
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.