by CJ, A Soldier’s Perspective
With our Democratic Congress and President slowly eating away at our Constitutional rights and “changing” the way our government intrudes into our lives and business, some states are fighting back. Bills are currently working their way through Congress that impose weapon and ammunition standards on states, forbid states from selling their own land, force states to comply with energy and emissions standards, and even a push to give state voting rights to D.C. residents – a change that would require a Constitutional amendment and possibly other challenges.
New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Missouri and Washington are just some of those states doing just that. Other states are sure to follow suit with their assertion of 10th Amendment rights, which state:
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.
New Hampshire’s House Concurrent Resolution 6 states that “any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America.”
Acts that would cause the state to invoke this extreme measure include:
I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition
This is notable and important because all too often we wonder what can be done about a federal government out of control. Not only would a state legally be able to declare its sovereignty, but also vote to rescind it’s Representatives and Senators from D.C.
Arizona’s HCR 2024 is also providing notice to the federal government to back off noting that “a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.” This is something I’ve been harping on for a few years now, both here and on the radio. Because of these violations, Arizona declares the following:
1. That the State of Arizona hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
2. That this Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
3. That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.
4. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.
Missouri is particularly perturbed by President Obama’s vaunted “Freedom of Choice Act” that he’s trying to push through Congress. This act “declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.” This is an obvious infraction upon state’s rights and led to Missouri’s assertion of sovereignty.
Missouri House Resolution 212 states:
Whereas, Barack Obama, President of the United States, has promised that one of the top priorities of his new Administration is to sign into law the “Freedom of Choice Act” which purports to classify abortion as a “fundamental right” equal in stature to the right of free speech and the right to vote – rights that, unlike abortion, are specifically enumerated in the United States Constitution; and
Whereas, the federal Freedom of Choice Act would invalidate any “statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action” of any federal, state, or local government or governmental official, or any person acting under governmental authority, that would “deny or interfere with a woman’s right to choose” abortion, or that would “discriminate against the exercise of the right…in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information”; and
Whereas, the federal Freedom of Choice Act would nullify any federal or state law “enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after the date of [its] enactment” and would effectively prevent the State of Missouri from enacting similar protective measures in the future…
Because of this and other efforts by our newly appointed Socialist-minded government, “the members of the House of Representatives of the Ninety-fifth General Assembly, hereby declare our sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.”
Washington State makes it clear in their resolution that states “are not subordinate to” the federal government, quoting Constitutionalists as Madison, Jefferson and Hamilton. Tired of being considered “agents of the federal government”, House Joint Memorial 4009 also declared Washington State’s sovereignty.
That this serve as a Notice and Demand to the federal government to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States established it and to cease and desist, effective immediately, any and all mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.
Retired Army Colonel – and American Patriot – Harry Riley tells us we can’t just stop there. “The next step is up to us,” he says. “[we have] to demand my State, your State to take the same action…….will you do it? Contact your State Representative and demand a similar resolution to NH, MO, WA, and AZ be introduced in your legislature….do it today.”
Phone calls are going out to my Texas and Alabama representatives the moment I hit “publish” on this post. It’s time we stand up to the encroachment of our rights by the federal government against the states by Repugnicans and Dumbocrats alike!
[...] #8 (01/12/2009 ) About 13.7 million taxpayers will refuse to pay taxes and a movement will arise that demands assurances that future taxes will not support immoral wars. 02/09/2009: A Tax Revolt Hits The United States? “Will a tax revolt hit the United States in 2009?” “According to Gerald Celente, it’s the first stage in overthrowing the corrupt goverment leaders and forcing them to listen to the People.” (Related: States Asserting Their Sovereignty [02/07/2009]) [...]
[...] States Asserting Their Sovereignty [...]
[...] Several state legislators in other states have also filed similar legislation. The “resolved” section is below: [...]
[...] When the sovereign States reassert their right to representation and remind the Federal government t…, you will see Washington, D.C. become what it was intended to be – a watchman abroad, a protector of the States, a mediator between disputing parties, and an ambassador for us in the case of abuse. [...]
[...] When the sovereign States reassert their right to representation and remind the Federal government t…, you will see Washington, D.C. become what it was intended to be – a watchman abroad, a protector of the States, a mediator between disputing parties, and an ambassador for us in the case of abuse. [...]