Important legal note: In past, the federal courts have found that they have supremacy over state courts; and they have also found that congress has supremacy over state legislatures.
But they have *never* found that the president has supremacy over state governors. This means that if a state governor resists presidential authority, the only recourse the president has is the use of armed force by the US military.
The last time this happened was when Arkansas governor Orval Faubus, Bill Clinton’s mentor, refused to let the Little Rock high school be integrated, despite court orders. He also turned out the Arkansas National Guard to prevent it being integrated by Federal Marshals.
But his mistake was in challenging president Eisenhower, who had backbone to spare. He sent in the 101st Airborne division.
However, in a spineless tyrant like Obama, ordering the military into conflict with the Texas National Guard would be highly unlikely from any number of directions. Especially those regular army officers who tried to order it suddenly appearing on the medical roster after having fallen down a flight of stairs.
“they have also found that congress has supremacy over state legislatures”
Not exactly. Congress is subject to the Constitution and that document clearly gives delegated powers to the Fed Gov and the remainder is reserved to the States and the People.
Now, have we the balls to hold the bastards in DC’s feet to the fire?
Guess we shall see. See you in DC on May 16th?