Posted on 06/28/2012 6:06:28 PM PDT by A Navy Vet
While it's now established law that the Fedgov can dictate to American citizens to purchase products/services they don't want OR suffer an additional tax, there was some curtailment to the ever over-reaching "commerce clause". That's a good thing. It's been abused for decades but this decision gives the States some leeway.
As I see it, our only hope is that enough States get together and NULLIFY this tax/mandate decision. Then what would the current/future Executive Branch do? Send in the military to enforce against the States? Not likely. Even Obambi doesn't have the nerve to try that and force a State versus Fedgov conflict. No one has the stomach for a new Revolution nor a Civil War II.
With hold tax money to the States? Okay, that could happen. That's one option for the Fedgov, but the States can also refuse to forward collected taxes. Again, what what the Fedgov do?
Don't forget there are already some 3 States that have passed State laws against Obambacare. There were 26 States opposing Obamacare in this suit. If those 26 (or even less) decide to opt out, Obamacare will fall financially. Of course that issue will work its way through the courts, also. Still, if the Governors of those states just say no NOW, the Fedgov will have a difficult time building its healthcare leviathan.
I see our only hope is from State Governors NULLIFYING this USSC decision and refusing to cooperate. There are no other remedies unless we maintain the House, get a filibuster proof Senate, and a President that will sign a repeal. I doubt the Senate super-majority will happen and don't trust Romney to sign such. Tell me where I'm wrong.
And if there ever were yet another fight for independence from Mexica, I'd like to see Texas at the front of it once again - remember the Alamo, La Bahia and San Jacinto!
But it also seems to that since the Supremes ruled that this is a tax, they can repeal it as a tax with just 51 Senators (plus the House and President.)
Unless enough States say they do exist and NULLIFY this ruling. Let's see what the Governors of the 26 States who sued the Fedgov have to say.
Maybe you missed my point that States' Rights were upheld even in this awful ruling. The Fedgov has now been limited on how it abuses the "commerce clause", even if to a small extent. I foresee many lawsuits in favor of States's rights, depending on the issue.
And no, I don't think that Roberts had that in mind for future rulings. But he, and the liberals on the court set precedence. They now have to live with it, until its over-ruled by a future Supreme Court.
You are probably thinking about secession...I'm not. I'm talking about the Individual States just not cooperating with a legislative law. That is nullification.
Plus, this is not the 1860's. No one in this age has the stomach for such. If enough States say they won't play to Obama's over-reach of their rights, then that will be the beginning of the end of absolute Fedgov control.
No one is going to civil or revolutionary war over this. It will be a matter of gamesmanship and who politically backs down first. I believe it will be the Fedgov, providing enough States are involved.
Arizona, Georgia (Alabama?) and many others have and are going to pass laws against Obambicare. Plus, many have and are passing laws against illegal immigration. Plus, many are passing new CCW and/or open carry laws. The States are currently re-enforcing their rights as I read almost every day.
The States are fed up. They are on the move. I really doubt that the some 26 States that sued the Fedgov over Obamacare are going to go "quietly into the good night" without a fight.
Again, the USSC gave the States (probably unknowingly) quite a weapon against Fedgov control with the majority opinion of over-reach for the "commerce clause". Here is our chance to reassert States' Rights!
I appreciate your post. I appreciate that some states are fighting back. I like the trend.
All I meant is that since the Civil War, the states have lost most of their sovereignty, and I’m sure I don’t need to explain this to you.
How many of the 50 states can tell the USA that they refuse to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act in forcing businesses to add handicap ramps for buildings and little wheelchair ramps for curb intersections? None, I think.
How many can tell the EPA that you can fill in a wetland with impunity? None I think.
How many states can tell the EPA to go stuff it and that they aren’t going to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty? None I think.
EPA is preventing drilling for oil in some states and coal exploration in others.
How many state can ban abortion? I understand none can as this was codified as a 1st amendment right in Roe.
This is what I meant when I said the states haven’t had rights since the Civil War. The amount of true state sovereignty is very very small today relative to the pre-civil war era. That is all I meant.
If I am wrong about that, then I apologize but that is my perception. Just as our personal property rights have been massively diminished in the past 150 years, the right of states to self-determination has been massively diminished as well.
I disagree. Although they ruled against AZ for passing immigration laws that mirrored Fedgov immigration law (which is not a State right no matter how much you twist the Constitution) ,they did uphold that AZ has a State right for LEO's to determine if someone they have detained if they are legally in the country.
I tend to agree with that ruling. I'm an ex-MinuteMan and have been a FAIR supporter since 1987. I was anti-illegal immigration proponent before it was ever a concern.
Plus, you forget that in 2011, the USSC held up Arizona's right to require employers to E-Verify their employees. That was a huge win and why AZ is experiencing less traffic over their border and less illegals looking for jobs.
IMHO, you are wrong about AZ SB1070. It was a win for States' rights. Arizona can now Constitutionally allow their local LEO's to determine if someone is legally in this country. The whole profiling/racist thing was put to bed, for the time being. Of course, there will be persons/groups that bring this stupid profiling thing back up, but it was still a States' Rights win. Yes, Obama has pretty much nullified that with his 800,000 or so free pass to children of illegals and his EO of stopping deporting such? Enjoy a partial win while you can! Have a pizza! Have a beer or two...
26, I say again, 26 of the 57 (har) States sued against Obamacare. Let's work with them to nullify the Roberts Court wrong decision.
I can't believe our entire health-care system and Congressional control was decided by one man. If Roberts had gone the correct way with the dissenters, the entire monstrosity would have been over-turned.
Again, Individual State nullification is now our only way out.
No more replies? Has no one anything to say about this?
The problem is the word 'immigration'.
While the federal gov has the authority to make a uniform rule for immigration, it does not the same as giving them rule over immigration.
The Constitution does give the federal gov authority for a presence at points of entry, yet this jurisdiction is concurrent with the States, not superior to them, AND the sole purpose of this 'border authority' concerns taxation.
There is no Constitutional authority for the federal gov to protect the border, only the authority to respond should a State petition for assistance.
To top it off, unless someone applies FOR citizenship, they are not an 'immigrant', but a denizen, and fall under the jurisdiction of the State.
The power of naturalization, and not that of denization, being delegated to congress, and the power of denization not being prohibited to the states by the constitution, that power ought not to be considered as given to congress, but, on the contrary, as being reserved to the states.
St. George Tucker
-------
That said, I'd like to say a big THANK YOU to you and any other Minutemen who may be lurking. You guys (and gals) have my up-most respect.
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.