Nullification: The states have a “nuclear option,” too

Nullify the income tax

Excellent post... and dead on! The only other possibility is, if the country goes completely bust, financially. That would be one way to potentially nullify our enormous debt to the word, but the other consequences could be very frightening.

I luv it! I will be speaking with my local Conservative Club and my county GOP organization to contact our state representatives to take a stand against this unprecedented Federal Govt.
Intervention into our lives. After all , we are only talking about our freedom and liberty

The ignorance of basic facts, will be the doom of liberty.

To begin with, the U.S. is NOT a nation-- it's a FEDERAL REPUBLIC of nations.

Second: state sovereignty does not come from the 10th Amendment: it PRE-DATES the Constitution, which is WHY

For example, when Lincoln invaded the seceding states in 1861, he did NOT say "there is no 10th Amendment--" he said "no state has ever been sovereign outside the Union." This was the LIE by which he authorized his invasion.

As long as people continue to stand on ignorant misconceptions of basic facts, there is no chance of correcting the evils which are perpetrated on the basis of such. For example, who does the law charge with JUDGING whether the 10th Amendment as been violated, i.e. having the last word?

Answer: THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
First, it's the legislature: they can decide whether or not to pass laws.
Then, the president: he can SIGN the laws into effect.
Then, the law MIGHT come before the federal Supreme Court-- which can also approve the law.

So we see, the federal government is the judge of its own powers-- just like Jefferson observed would be the case, if the states were not sovereign.

HELLO? Even if the entire US population jumps up and votes that a law is unconstitutional, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE-- the law is still in effect. At most, they can BEG the federal government to change it-- including changing the legislature. But the people have NO drect power over the federal government.

However, virtually ALL federal laws are approved by the popular majority; i.e. we live under a system of plebiscite. It's the state-minorities who suffer-- but this minority usually changes with each law, i.e. one law might violate the constitution against New England, another might violate it against the Midwest, etc. Essentially it's done with "horse-trading" and "rent-seeking" in order to barter away the people's power.

This is simply the inevitable political effect, of what happens when the states are no longer NATIONALLY sovereign; as Vattel expressly states in the Law of Nations, "Of a state that has passed under the dominion of another: But a people that has passed under the dominion of another is no longer a state, and can no longer avail itself directly of the law of nations. Such were the nations and kingdoms which the Romans rendered subject to their empire; the generality even of those whom they honoured with the name of friends and allies no longer formed real states. Within themselves they were governed by their own laws and magistrates; but without, they were in every thing obliged to follow the orders of Rome; they dared not of themselves either to make war or contract alliances; and could not treat with nations."

That is what happened to the states of the U.S.A, ever since 1860 if not sooner. And today's only response is "But they had SLAVES!"
Yeah, and now we're ALL slaves, of the federal government.
Until people get an education-- and a clue-- about basic facts, they'll be doomed to error.

Josh, Your statement:

"The good that nullification does is to encourage a change in thought and political strategy by advocates of limited government. Once they begin to see the potential of utilizing state government in the way the framers intended, as a check against unconstitutional federal power grabs, the possibilities for reform are endless."

is the key to getting the 10thA started in each a state. I have a tendency to do it all at once in a sweeping reform, but picking the usurping and dangerous federal mandates off one at a time is doable. In many states nullification has already been used, we just need to inform our Legislators about every Federal bill and mandate as they come down the line, and encourage them to pick up the pace of nullification.

I just want to mention that state sovereignty is not the 10th Amendment; it is older than the Constitution, and as old as the states themselves. Every state is a sovereign nation, going back to its origin as early as 1776; and the state's PEOPLE are its sovereign rulers.

This is the law, even though it's been suppressed by 140+ years of illegal distortion; however the law has never been CHANGED, and so state sovereignty still exists; it simply needs to be liberated by those with the courage to do so against the Leviathan state.

This nonsense about "the 10th Amendment" is simply a prime example of self-proclaimed libertarians "pulling punches," since the federal government has the final WORD on the 10th Amendment, under current policy. For the fed, and not the people of the state, are currently the ruling sovereigns in that none can override them.

So the people of the states can yell, scream, jump up and down, protest, write letters, or even try to secede or nullify federal law; but without a recognition of their state's national sovereignty, it will have NO EFFECT against the federal majority.

Madison was clear about this in his 1800 Report on the Virginia Resolutions, when he said that

"The states [meaning the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity], then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition."

State *government,* meanwhile, can't do a thing about it. They can refuse to cooperate with a law that is not written pursuant to the Constitution, but this will have no effect if the federal majority enforces it.

As Madison continued, "On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve."

And so it has-- and will continue to do so, until the People of at least ONE state re-assert their sovereignty as a separate and equal nation, as it exists by LAW.

"These days, nullification is an obsolete and misunderstood term, ostensibly discredited as a viable policy option more than a century ago by four years of bloody Civil War."

Not quite. It wasn't a "civil war," any more than Saddam's invasion and conquest of Kuwait-- even though he also termed it such. Every state was, and REMAINS, a sovereign nation-- by law; otherwise, ANY nation can invade and conquer a weaker one, and call it a "civil war."
Unfortunately, history has become a den of shills, as the state hand-picks court-historians and charlatans who validate its claims of legitimacy-- as do all despotisms.

However the fact remains, that the popularly sovereign states never expressly surrendered their sovereignty in any law; and so power-grubbers simply INVENTED it, and used force in order to re-write history.

Unfortunately, few libertarians have the GUTS to take on Leviathan, and so they sell out their cause by pulling their punches out of fear, lacking the courage of their convictions, or courage in general.

Michael,

The good that nullification does is to encourage a change in thought and political strategy by advocates of limited government. Once they begin to see the potential of utilizing state government in the way the framers intended, as a check against unconstitutional federal power grabs, the possibilities for reform are endless.

Of course, nullification will not solve every problem all at once, but it can start us on a course toward restoring our constitutional republic without waiting for the federal government to shrink itself.

Thanks for reading.

michael wondered: "What good does nullification do when the States’ citizens will still have their earnings confiscated to pay for non-nullifying states health care?"

Not if those states also enact the Walter Williams federal tax escrow law, which the League of the South put into writing back in 1999. I have both the Williams column and the draft legislation [.pdf]; write to strider1955@gmail.com for your copy.

michael wondered: "What good does nullification do when the States’ citizens will still have their earnings confiscated to pay for non-nullifying states health care?"

Not if those states also enact the Walter Williams federal tax escrow law, which the League of the South put into writing back in 1999. I have both the Williams column and the draft legislation [.pdf]; write to strider1955@gmail.com for your copy.

What good does nullification do when the States' citizens will still have their earnings confiscated to pay for non-nullifying states health care?

The federal government relies on the lack of integrity (Just Say No), by primarily state political officials, when offering massive funding in almost every category imaginable.

The enactment of the Federal Reserve Act allowed the federal government to expand this financial temptation beyond anyone's wildest imagination. The unfettered borrowing, by the fedreal government, keeps this feature to our society going.

Every program enacted in the last fifty (50) years has had it's "Plan" to raise monies through various taxations methods. Virtually none have worked as planned or we would not have the national debt we now have.

And yet, Baseline accounting (everything increases 10% each subsequent year) rules the day in federal budgeting.

Since both federal and state pols have nothing to offer other than the sale of stolen goods, they make strong bedfellows in this interplay. Thus you have Hilliary and Rahm making statements about "...never let a good catastrophy go to waste (sic)." They know the gradual decrease in what once was the fiber of Western culture has led to this attitude of "let me get a little bit o' dat".

It is very, very difficult to find that one politician who would stand up to the temptation of "funding by the feds" and "just say no".

Ask yourself this question, "What collateral does the federal government present to the Federal Reserve when borrowing funds?" Cut off that collateral and you cut off their ability to continue to borrow.

Yes, of course enforce the 10th by nullification; AND repeal the false 17th 'a', returning control of U.S. Senators to their respective State's legislatures.
See www.USchronology.com Search on 17th Amendment, for example:
May 5, 1913
William Jennings Bryan, Secretary of State, continues the anti-Constitutional Revolution of 1913, by declaring the proposed 17th amendment (popular election of United States Senators) has received the required ratification by three-fourths of the State legislatures. Although unanimous ratification is required on amendments affecting State suffrage in the Senate, as per Article V. This fraud ends the most important feature of federalism—the State’s check on the United States government—by concentrating unwarranted power in the Federal government in the District of Columbia.
9 Fed. Pap. par. 16; 45 Fed. Pap. pars. 7, 9; 52 Fed. Pap. par. 10; 59 Fed. Pap. pars. 6, 8-9; 62 Fed. Pap. pars. 4, 6, Cooke, 50, 55-56, 308, 311-13, 353, 357-59, 415, 416-16. Winston Churchill, A History of the English Speaking Peoples, four volumes, (New York: Dorset Press, 1956-58), 3:255. Irving S. and Nell Kull, eds., A Short Chronology of American History, 1492-1950, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1952), 214. Forrest McDonald, Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Economic Origins of the Constitution, (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1985), 100, 277. [updated 6/20/2000]

Yes, of course enforce the 10th by nullification; AND repeal the false 17th 'a', returning control of U.S. Senators to their respective State's legislatures.
See www.USchronology.com Search on 17th Amendment, for example:
May 5, 1913
William Jennings Bryan, Secretary of State, continues the anti-Constitutional Revolution of 1913, by declaring the proposed 17th amendment (popular election of United States Senators) has received the required ratification by three-fourths of the State legislatures. Although unanimous ratification is required on amendments affecting State suffrage in the Senate, as per Article V. This fraud ends the most important feature of federalism—the State’s check on the United States government—by concentrating unwarranted power in the Federal government in the District of Columbia.
9 Fed. Pap. par. 16; 45 Fed. Pap. pars. 7, 9; 52 Fed. Pap. par. 10; 59 Fed. Pap. pars. 6, 8-9; 62 Fed. Pap. pars. 4, 6, Cooke, 50, 55-56, 308, 311-13, 353, 357-59, 415, 416-16. Winston Churchill, A History of the English Speaking Peoples, four volumes, (New York: Dorset Press, 1956-58), 3:255. Irving S. and Nell Kull, eds., A Short Chronology of American History, 1492-1950, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1952), 214. Forrest McDonald, Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Economic Origins of the Constitution, (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1985), 100, 277. [updated 6/20/2000]

The ' Light at the end of the tunnel ' is the "Obama goverment" ' BURNING THE CONSTITUTION'.
The way I see it, Our ‘State Senators and Representatives‘ are equated in Status to ‘ Foreign Diplomats ‘. If Texas was a Separate Country and not a ‘State ‘, our ‘Diplomats’ would be ‘Posted’ in many ‘Foreign Countries’ to “Look Out For the Interests Of Texas and Our Citizens”. If the ‘Diplomats’, for what ever reason, can not or would not do there Required Functions, The ‘Diplomat’ Should Be Recalled. Possibly Re-posting a Different Diplomat. If the results do not improve, remains the same or decline / worsen, ‘Diplomatic Relations’ Should Be Suspended or Broken Off and the ‘Diplomat’ should return to Home Country ( Texas ) and advise Our President..
Yes, I know Texas ‘Ceded this Important Function’ to the U. S. Government through the Limitation of and within the “U. S. Constitution” Especial Citing the 10th. Amendment “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”.
Now, The United States Government has Grossly Overstepped the Limitations of the “U. S. Constitution” and is behaving as a “Belligerent Foreign Nation towards and to the States”. If this ‘Ignoring’ of the “U. S. Constitution” is allowed to continue, “The United States will Fall As A Nation” and The States Will Reform into Separate Regional Nations and / or Alliances beneficial only to themselves and the need for ‘ Foreign Diplomats ‘ will surly return.

The ' Light at the end of the tunnel ' is the "Obama goverment" ' BURNING THE CONSTITUTION'.
The way I see it, Our ‘State Senators and Representatives‘ are equated in Status to ‘ Foreign Diplomats ‘. If Texas was a Separate Country and not a ‘State ‘, our ‘Diplomats’ would be ‘Posted’ in many ‘Foreign Countries’ to “Look Out For the Interests Of Texas and Our Citizens”. If the ‘Diplomats’, for what ever reason, can not or would not do there Required Functions, The ‘Diplomat’ Should Be Recalled. Possibly Re-posting a Different Diplomat. If the results do not improve, remains the same or decline / worsen, ‘Diplomatic Relations’ Should Be Suspended or Broken Off and the ‘Diplomat’ should return to Home Country ( Texas ) and advise Our President..
Yes, I know Texas ‘Ceded this Important Function’ to the U. S. Government through the Limitation of and within the “U. S. Constitution” Especial Citing the 10th. Amendment “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”.
Now, The United States Government has Grossly Overstepped the Limitations of the “U. S. Constitution” and is behaving as a “Belligerent Foreign Nation towards and to the States”. If this ‘Ignoring’ of the “U. S. Constitution” is allowed to continue, “The United States will Fall As A Nation” and The States Will Reform into Separate Regional Nations and / or Alliances beneficial only to themselves and the need for ‘ Foreign Diplomats ‘ will surly return.

You say "both political parties". I know it's nitpicking at at otherwise excellent article, but there are more than two political parties. It's thinking that there are only two options that got us into this bind. We need to remember the others -- particularly those that are constitutionally based.

Derek, you sound motivated! Get in touch with me-

bryce@tenthamendmentcenter.com

2010 will be the year that Americans rediscover the 10th Amendment at the state legislature level.

"10th in 2010"........Has a nice ring to it!

I am here in Virginia talking to my legislators about past efforts like HR61 and the need to stand up against Federal Power Grabs.

And I am reminding them that Virginia's own constitutional amendments like...Article 11, Sec 4 ...protecting the right to hunt, fish, and harvest game...are crucial in the battle against Cass Sunstein....and other lunatics....

In 1814, representatives of the States of Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Vermont met at the Hartford Convention. They drafted a document known as the REPORT. The document made the following declaration:

"In case of deliberate, dangerous, and palpable infractions of the Constitution affecting the sovereignty of a State and the liberties of the people, it is not only the right, but the duty of such State to interpose its authority for protection in the manner best calculated to secure that end."

And States..."must be their own judges and execute their own decisions."

In 1829, the Virginia House adopted a set of resolutions. The first one stated:

"That the Constitution of the United States, being a federative compact between sovereign States in construing which no common arbiter is known, each State has the right to construe the compact for itself."

If 20+ states decide to nullify a federal law, what are pelosi and reid going to do? Bomb Texas??

Well, I know what my Tea Party sign will say from now on:

"Nullification: The states have a “nuclear option,” too!"

I won't be happy until every Tea Partier in Phoenix has visited the 10th Amendment Center and read this article.

Well, I know what my Tea Party sign will say from now on:

"Nullification: The states have a “nuclear option,” too!"

I won't be happy until every Tea Partier in Phoenix has visited the 10th Amendment Center and read this article.

In his book- "The Federal Government, Its True Nature and Character" (1868), Abel Upshur wrote:

“So far as our own (federal) government is concerned, I venture to predict that it will become absolute and irresponsible, precisely in proportion as the rights of the States shall cease to be respected, and their authority to interpose for the correction of federal abuses shall be denied and overthrown. It should be the object of every patriot in the United States to encourage a high respect for the State governments. The people should be taught to regard them as their greatest interest, and as the first objects of their duty and affection. Maintained in their just rights and powers, they form the true balance-wheel, the only effectual check on federal encroachments.” p. 239

“The danger is, not that the States will interpose too often, but that they will rather submit to federal usurpations, than incur the risk of embarrassing that government, by any attempts to check and control it. Flagrant abuses alone, and such as public liberty cannot endure, will ever call into action this salutary and conservative power of the States. But whether this check be the best or the worst in its nature, it is at least one which our system allows. It is not found within the Constitution, but exists independent of it. As that Constitution was formed by sovereign States, they alone are authorized, whenever the question arises between them and their common government, to determine, in the last resort, what powers they intended to confer on it. This is an inseparable incident of sovereignty; a right which belongs to the States, simply because they have never surrendered it to any other power.” 240-241.

In his book- "The Federal Government, Its True Nature and Character" (1868), Abel Upshur wrote:

“So far as our own (federal) government is concerned, I venture to predict that it will become absolute and irresponsible, precisely in proportion as the rights of the States shall cease to be respected, and their authority to interpose for the correction of federal abuses shall be denied and overthrown. It should be the object of every patriot in the United States to encourage a high respect for the State governments. The people should be taught to regard them as their greatest interest, and as the first objects of their duty and affection. Maintained in their just rights and powers, they form the true balance-wheel, the only effectual check on federal encroachments.” p. 239

“The danger is, not that the States will interpose too often, but that they will rather submit to federal usurpations, than incur the risk of embarrassing that government, by any attempts to check and control it. Flagrant abuses alone, and such as public liberty cannot endure, will ever call into action this salutary and conservative power of the States. But whether this check be the best or the worst in its nature, it is at least one which our system allows. It is not found within the Constitution, but exists independent of it. As that Constitution was formed by sovereign States, they alone are authorized, whenever the question arises between them and their common government, to determine, in the last resort, what powers they intended to confer on it. This is an inseparable incident of sovereignty; a right which belongs to the States, simply because they have never surrendered it to any other power.” 240-241.