Likely the same as with Masa, a naked Rahm in the gym showers.
Posted on 03/10/2010 11:52:14 AM PST by Willie Green
Utah lawmakers angry over federal ownership of land in the state approved the use of eminent domain Tuesday to take some of the most valuable parcels.
The goal is to spark a U.S. Supreme Court battle that legislators' own attorneys acknowledge has little chance of success.
But Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and other Republicans say the case is still worth fighting because if the state wins it could reap millions of dollars for state schools each year.
More than 60 percent of Utah is owned by the U.S. government, and policy makers here have long complained that federal ownership hinders their ability to generate tax revenue and adequately fund public schools.
Utah spends less per student than any other state and has the nation's largest class sizes.
"Access to these lands will unlock billions of dollars for our kids," said Sen. Dan Liljenquist, R-Bountiful. "This is our own land that we can't get access to because of an unreasonable federal government."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
That was then..... this is now. People & state governments are now sick & tired of the massive uncontrolled overreaching by the fed gubmint. I think we need some states to just stand up and declare the feds have no ownership of lands in those states...and dare the feds to do something about it.
I think the feds will see & experience the hornets nest they kick up with this.
YES! Harrass the Feds in every way you possibly can, including ticketing all of the mail trucks that are double-parked on Utah streets.
It is home to illegal alien marijuana farms. The feds won't deal with it because the drug dealers will shoot back.
Most of the USSA will become wilderness again. The one world orderers have already signed the treaties. All they have to do now is kill off about 60% of the population.
Coming soon to your neighborhood.
Ironically, the Kelo decision may be the precedent.
Then seize the IRS offices in Salt Lake and tear them down to build a Chuck E Cheese (since you can easily prove it will be of more economic benefit to the community)
I'd add the BLM to the Kelo list, along with the IRS.
Once we get state legislators that have a pair, we can then work on the fed to abolish the EPA and Dept of the Interior.
Then work on the entirety of the IRS and the DEA.
NICE! I hope Utah wins, this would go a very long way towards both undermine liberals eminent domain position, and the abuse of Federal authority.
In fact we should probably have a class action suit against the federal government. Most Western States have this problem, some more then others. In fact one of the main drivers for the Alaskan independence movement is exactly this problem.
In the western states excluding Texas(owned all its lands from the start due to being its own county) the Feds have basically been hording everything:
http://www.brianhayes.com/images/map-federal-land.jpg
Expect Alaska and a lot of other western State to follow suit.
The United States Federal Government should not be just siting on land, and using it to harass our States. it should in fact be selling off this land to lower our dept.
Instead Washington Bureaucrats in D.C. are hording it as a lever of control over our States.
Most of the effect of environmental regulations for example are owed to the existents of federal land and the “possible” impact on such land.
Article 6 section 2 of the United states Constitution, the so called “supremacy clause” speaks only of laws and treaty’s not property.
“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.”
This does not make Federal property above that of state law.
Unless you should argue that such land is not under the solvently of the State, and is in fact a federal territory, like that of the district of Columbia.
A fact disputed by the cession of such rights in the addition and recolonization of statehood of such said state.
Nor should the so called supremacy clause make Federal government property superior to State laws.
Make the Federal employees in black robes choose what they want to believe.
We shall hold them in contempt of the laws of the United states, and the treaty of statehood, should they choose to refuses to recognize the sovereignty authority of our state, as already irreversibly recognized by the united states in our admission to Statehood.
After they have been given the chance to do the right thing, and choose to ignore their oath to up hold our Constitution’s recolonization of our solvently, we should take control of the land anyway.
The United States Constitution does not belong to the Federal court to redefine, but rather the Federal court belongs to the Constitution of the United States and its empowers the people and States of the United States to uphold and defend, just like all the other Oath taking party’s.
Should the court in this act CHOOSE to ignore its responsibility, in the upholding of that constitution, the responsibility still exist in the State legislators and in the congress.
This is the propose of checks and balances so that no one man or group of men may unilaterally hold absolute and thus unlawful power, but rather such solvent authority may be preserved closest to the individual people form whence it came.
To allow any one central authority such as the Federal court to negate its duty to uphold the constitution be the final word on the enforcement and upholding of such a constitution is to spell the end of that constitution as a law, and the beginning of the rule of men of that distant and centerline court rather then the rule of law.
This can NEVER be premised in a free Constitution of civil republican government!
They’re using courts, not cannon.
All things considered, Lawyers may be more effective.
Likely the same as with Masa, a naked Rahm in the gym showers.
Back at statehood, the fed's imported thousands of military, changed the residency law to throw the election. Most Alaskans wanted to remain a territory as no economic base; they knew they couldn't afford state government and taxes would explode due to statehood, which they did. AIP mainly wanted a true referendum to see if Alaskans wanted statehood, territory status, or remain like Philpines or P.R.
The BATFE is a branch of the IRS.
Alcohol, tobacco and firearms I think are all taxed beginning at the federal level, so they fall under the jurisdiction of the IRS.
See my post 33.
When I was a kid back in the 60’s, I was taught that the only land actually owned by the Federal Government were the military installations, federal labs and manufacturing sites, Government buildings, etc.
All the other lands belonged to all of the citizens, hence they were called Public Lands, and were only administered by the Feds at the will of the Public.
These Public Lands were open to various kinds of claims (mining,logging,ranching,etc.) and homesteading, patenting, in order to provide a fair and good use to the Public and prevent monopolizing of the lands by the few powerfull people, corporations and the government itself.
So when did the Federal Government buy all of these Public Lands from the Citizens of the United States and make them Federal Lands(Property)?
James
Grande Staircase Escalante National Monument locked up one of the largest 3 low sulfur coal deposits in the world - it may be the largest. The other two are in Indonesia and Brazil. Clinton locked it up just as it was ready to be exploited. I’m told utilities in Florida have to import Indonesian low sulphur coal to meet EPA requirements - enriching Raidy and the Chinese military. Those lands in Utah were laid out in a grid with the proceeds from the mineral deposits going to support their school system.
In that case, Marshall wrote the memorable line, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." That case is why most commentators believe that this Utah effort will fail, though I could construct a logical argument why Utah should prevail.
Congressman Billybob
World Heritage Sites, are controlled by the UN already.
Something to keep an eye on.
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.