I mean, sure if you want to resist the federal and state government because you subjectively believe the law is invalid but no legislature has repealed the law or court invalidated it, that’s fine, but all that means is that you’ve made a moral decision to break the law.
So don’t be surprised or outraged if you end up in jail/contempt of court/punished by the system as a result.
The laughable thing about this is that she’s an elected democrat who is just doing this to bolster her reelection chances in a swing district.
Hard to nullify invalid and unconstitutional law all by yourself. That’s why the fight for freedom against unconstitutional federal acts, which by definition are acts of tyranny, must be waged at the state level.
But didn’t the American Revolution have its beginnings with individuals declaring the tyranny of oppressive English law to be invalid? “The moral decision to break the law” under these circumstances can possibly best be described by words in the Declaration of Independence:
“[W]hen a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their RIGHT, it is their DUTY, to throw off such Government.”
We have a moral DUTY to resist and nullify unconstitutional federal acts. It may be that such resistance could forestall and possibly prevent secession. But the Declaration of Independence gives us the moral template of the required steps for eventual secession, every step hoping against state secession unless or until necessary.